Source author record

Guillaume Saint-Jacques

Guillaume Saint-Jacques appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Applications cs.CY econ.EM econ.GN q-fin.EC Social and Information Networks

Catalog footprint

What is connected

3works

6topics

4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Open graph Browse works

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

preprint2022arXiv

Choosing an algorithmic fairness metric for an online marketplace: Detecting and quantifying algorithmic bias on LinkedIn

In this paper, we derive an algorithmic fairness metric from the fairness notion of equal opportunity for equally qualified candidates for recommendation algorithms commonly used by two-sided marketplaces. We borrow from the economic literature on discrimination to arrive at a test for detecting bias that is solely attributable to the algorithm, as opposed to other sources such as societal inequality or human bias on the part of platform users. We use the proposed method to measure and quantify algorithmic bias with respect to gender of two algorithms used by LinkedIn, a popular online platform used by job seekers and employers. Moreover, we introduce a framework and the rationale for distinguishing algorithmic bias from human bias, both of which can potentially exist on a two-sided platform where algorithms make recommendations to human users. Finally, we discuss the shortcomings of a few other common algorithmic fairness metrics and why they do not capture the fairness notion of equal opportunity for equally qualified candidates.

preprint2022arXiv

Representation-Aware Experimentation: Group Inequality Analysis for A/B Testing and Alerting

As companies adopt increasingly experimentation-driven cultures, it is crucial to develop methods for understanding any potential unintended consequences of those experiments. We might have specific questions about those consequences (did a change increase or decrease gender representation equality among content creators?); we might also wonder whether if we have not yet considered the right question (that is, we don't know what we don't know). Hence we address the problem of unintended consequences in experimentation from two perspectives: namely, pre-specified vs. data-driven selection, of dimensions of interest. For a specified dimension, we introduce a statistic to measure deviation from equal representation (DER statistic), give its asymptotic distribution, and evaluate finite-sample performance. We explain how to use this statistic to search across large-scale experimentation systems to alert us to any extreme unintended consequences on group representation. We complement this methodology by discussing a search for heterogeneous treatment effects along a set of dimensions with causal trees, modified slightly for practicalities in our ecosystem, and used here as a way to dive deeper into experiments flagged by the DER statistic alerts. We introduce a method for simulating data that closely mimics observed data at LinkedIn, and evaluate the performance of DER statistics in simulations. Last, we give a case study from LinkedIn, and show how these methodologies empowered us to discover surprising and important insights about group representation. Code for replication is available in an appendix.

preprint2020arXiv

Fairness through Experimentation: Inequality in A/B testing as an approach to responsible design

As technology continues to advance, there is increasing concern about individuals being left behind. Many businesses are striving to adopt responsible design practices and avoid any unintended consequences of their products and services, ranging from privacy vulnerabilities to algorithmic bias. We propose a novel approach to fairness and inclusiveness based on experimentation. We use experimentation because we want to assess not only the intrinsic properties of products and algorithms but also their impact on people. We do this by introducing an inequality approach to A/B testing, leveraging the Atkinson index from the economics literature. We show how to perform causal inference over this inequality measure. We also introduce the concept of site-wide inequality impact, which captures the inclusiveness impact of targeting specific subpopulations for experiments, and show how to conduct statistical inference on this impact. We provide real examples from LinkedIn, as well as an open-source, highly scalable implementation of the computation of the Atkinson index and its variance in Spark/Scala. We also provide over a year's worth of learnings -- gathered by deploying our method at scale and analyzing thousands of experiments -- on which areas and which kinds of product innovations seem to inherently foster fairness through inclusiveness.