On Fair Selection in the Presence of Implicit Variance
  Quota-based fairness mechanisms like the so-called Rooney rule or four-fifths
rule are used in selection problems such as hiring or college admission to
reduce inequalities based on sensitive demographic attributes. These mechanisms
are often viewed as introducing a trade-off between selection fairness and
utility. In recent work, however, Kleinberg and Raghavan showed that, in the
presence of implicit bias in estimating candidates' quality, the Rooney rule
can increase the utility of the selection process.
  We argue that even in the absence of implicit bias, the estimates of
candidates' quality from different groups may differ in another fundamental
way, namely, in their variance. We term this phenomenon implicit variance and
we ask: can fairness mechanisms be beneficial to the utility of a selection
process in the presence of implicit variance (even in the absence of implicit
bias)? To answer this question, we propose a simple model in which candidates
have a true latent quality that is drawn from a group-independent normal
distribution. To make the selection, a decision maker receives an unbiased
estimate of the quality of each candidate, with normal noise, but whose
variance depends on the candidate's group. We then compare the utility obtained
by imposing a fairness mechanism that we term $\gamma$-rule (it includes
demographic parity and the four-fifths rule as special cases), to that of a
group-oblivious selection algorithm that picks the candidates with the highest
estimated quality independently of their group. Our main result shows that the
demographic parity mechanism always increases the selection utility, while any
$\gamma$-rule weakly increases it. We extend our model to a two-stage selection
process where the true quality is observed at the second stage. We discuss
multiple extensions of our results, in particular to different distributions of
the true latent quality.
