A Sandbox Tool to Bias(Stress)-Test Fairness Algorithms
  Motivated by the growing importance of reducing unfairness in ML predictions,
Fair-ML researchers have presented an extensive suite of algorithmic
"fairness-enhancing" remedies. Most existing algorithms, however, are agnostic
to the sources of the observed unfairness. As a result, the literature
currently lacks guiding frameworks to specify conditions under which each
algorithmic intervention can potentially alleviate the underpinning cause of
unfairness. To close this gap, we scrutinize the underlying biases (e.g., in
the training data or design choices) that cause observational unfairness. We
present a bias-injection sandbox tool to investigate fairness consequences of
various biases and assess the effectiveness of algorithmic remedies in the
presence of specific types of bias. We call this process the
bias(stress)-testing of algorithmic interventions. Unlike existing toolkits,
ours provides a controlled environment to counterfactually inject biases in the
ML pipeline. This stylized setup offers the distinct capability of testing
fairness interventions beyond observational data and against an unbiased
benchmark. In particular, we can test whether a given remedy can alleviate the
injected bias by comparing the predictions resulting after the intervention in
the biased setting with true labels in the unbiased regime -- that is, before
any bias injection. We illustrate the utility of our toolkit via a
proof-of-concept case study on synthetic data. Our empirical analysis showcases
the type of insights that can be obtained through our simulations.
