Researcher profile

Venkata Sriram Siddhardh Nadendla

Venkata Sriram Siddhardh Nadendla contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
7topics
2close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

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

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

On Learning and Enforcing Latent Assessment Models using Binary Feedback from Human Auditors Regarding Black-Box Classifiers

Algorithmic fairness literature presents numerous mathematical notions and metrics, and also points to a tradeoff between them while satisficing some or all of them simultaneously. Furthermore, the contextual nature of fairness notions makes it difficult to automate bias evaluation in diverse algorithmic systems. Therefore, in this paper, we propose a novel model called latent assessment model (LAM) to characterize binary feedback provided by human auditors, by assuming that the auditor compares the classifier's output to his or her own intrinsic judgment for each input. We prove that individual and group fairness notions are guaranteed as long as the auditor's intrinsic judgments inherently satisfy the fairness notion at hand, and are relatively similar to the classifier's evaluations. We also demonstrate this relationship between LAM and traditional fairness notions on three well-known datasets, namely COMPAS, German credit and Adult Census Income datasets. Furthermore, we also derive the minimum number of feedback samples needed to obtain PAC learning guarantees to estimate LAM for black-box classifiers. These guarantees are also validated via training standard machine learning algorithms on real binary feedback elicited from 400 human auditors regarding COMPAS.

preprint2020arXiv

A Difficulty in Controlling Blockchain Mining Costs via Cryptopuzzle Difficulty

Blockchain systems often employ proof-of-work consensus protocols to validate and add transactions into hashchains. These protocols stimulate competition among miners in solving cryptopuzzles (e.g. SHA-256 hash computation in Bitcoin) in exchange for a monetary reward. Here, we model mining as an all-pay auction, where miners' computational efforts are interpreted as bids, and the allocation function is the probability of solving the cryptopuzzle in a single attempt with unit (normalized) computational capability. Such an allocation function captures how blockchain systems control the difficulty of the cryptopuzzle as a function of miners' computational abilities (bids). In an attempt to reduce mining costs, we investigate designing a mining auction mechanism which induces a logit equilibrium amongst the miners with choice distributions that are unilaterally decreasing with costs at each miner. We show it is impossible to design a lenient allocation function that does this. Specifically, we show that there exists no allocation function that discourages miners to bid higher costs at logit equilibrium, if the rate of change of difficulty with respect to each miner's cost is bounded by the inverse of the sum of costs at all the miners.

preprint2020arXiv

On the Identification of Fair Auditors to Evaluate Recommender Systems based on a Novel Non-Comparative Fairness Notion

Decision-support systems are information systems that offer support to people's decisions in various applications such as judiciary, real-estate and banking sectors. Lately, these support systems have been found to be discriminatory in the context of many practical deployments. In an attempt to evaluate and mitigate these biases, algorithmic fairness literature has been nurtured using notions of comparative justice, which relies primarily on comparing two/more individuals or groups within the society that is supported by such systems. However, such a fairness notion is not very useful in the identification of fair auditors who are hired to evaluate latent biases within decision-support systems. As a solution, we introduce a paradigm shift in algorithmic fairness via proposing a new fairness notion based on the principle of non-comparative justice. Assuming that the auditor makes fairness evaluations based on some (potentially unknown) desired properties of the decision-support system, the proposed fairness notion compares the system's outcome with that of the auditor's desired outcome. We show that the proposed fairness notion also provides guarantees in terms of comparative fairness notions by proving that any system can be deemed fair from the perspective of comparative fairness (e.g. individual fairness and statistical parity) if it is non-comparatively fair with respect to an auditor who has been deemed fair with respect to the same fairness notions. We also show that the converse holds true in the context of individual fairness. A brief discussion is also presented regarding how our fairness notion can be used to identify fair and reliable auditors, and how we can use them to quantify biases in decision-support systems.