Ethical and Fairness Implications of Model Multiplicity
  While predictive models are a purely technological feat, they may operate in
a social context in which benign engineering choices entail unexpected
real-life consequences. Fairness -- pertaining both to individuals and groups
-- is one of such considerations; it surfaces when data capture protected
characteristics of people who may be discriminated upon these attributes. This
notion has predominantly been studied for a fixed predictive model, sometimes
under different classification thresholds, striving to identify and eradicate
its undesirable behaviour. Here we backtrack on this assumption and explore a
novel definition of fairness where individuals can be harmed when one predictor
is chosen ad hoc from a group of equally well performing models, i.e., in view
of model multiplicity. Since a person may be classified differently across
models that are otherwise considered equivalent, this individual could argue
for a model with a more favourable outcome, possibly causing others to be
adversely affected. We introduce this scenario with a two-dimensional example
based on linear classification; then investigate its analytical properties in a
broader context; and finally present experimental results on data sets popular
in fairness studies. Our findings suggest that such unfairness can be found in
real-life situations and may be difficult to mitigate with technical measures
alone, as doing so degrades certain metrics of predictive performance.
