On preserving non-discrimination when combining expert advice
  We study the interplay between sequential decision making and avoiding
discrimination against protected groups, when examples arrive online and do not
follow distributional assumptions. We consider the most basic extension of
classical online learning: "Given a class of predictors that are individually
non-discriminatory with respect to a particular metric, how can we combine them
to perform as well as the best predictor, while preserving non-discrimination?"
Surprisingly we show that this task is unachievable for the prevalent notion of
"equalized odds" that requires equal false negative rates and equal false
positive rates across groups. On the positive side, for another notion of
non-discrimination, "equalized error rates", we show that running separate
instances of the classical multiplicative weights algorithm for each group
achieves this guarantee. Interestingly, even for this notion, we show that
algorithms with stronger performance guarantees than multiplicative weights
cannot preserve non-discrimination.
