Does Representational Fairness Imply Empirical Fairness?

AbstractNLP technologies can cause unintended harms if learned representations encode sensitive attributes of the author, or predictions systematically vary in quality across groups. Popular debiasing approaches, like adversarial training, remove sensitive information from representations in order to reduce disparate performance, however the relation between representational fairness and empirical (performance) fairness has not been systematically studied. This paper fills this gap, and proposes a novel debiasing method building on contrastive learning to encourage a latent space that separates instances based on target label, while mixing instances that share protected attributes. Our results show the effectiveness of our new method and, more importantly, show across a set of diverse debiasing methods that representational fairness does not imply empirical fairness. This work highlights the importance of aligning and understanding the relation of the optimization objective and final fairness target.