arXiv subjects

Joshua R. Loftus

Publications and source records attributed to Joshua R. Loftus.

13 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2025

Counterfactually Fair Reinforcement Learning via Sequential Data Preprocessing

When applied in healthcare, reinforcement learning (RL) seeks to dynamically match the right interventions to subjects to maximize population benefit. However, the learned policy may disproportionately allocate efficacious actions to one subpopulation, creating or exacerbating disparities in other socioeconomically-disadvantaged subgroups. These biases tend to occur in multi-stage decision making and can be self-perpetuating, which if unaccounted for could cause serious unintended consequences that limit access to care or treatment benefit. Counterfactual fairness (CF) offers a promising statistical tool grounded in causal inference to formulate and study fairness. In this paper, we propose a general framework for fair sequential decision making. We theoretically characterize the optimal CF policy and prove its stationarity, which greatly simplifies the search for optimal CF policies by leveraging existing RL algorithms. The theory also motivates a sequential data preprocessing algorithm to achieve CF decision making under an additive noise assumption. We prove and then validate our policy learning approach in controlling unfairness and attaining optimal value through simulations. Analysis of a digital health dataset designed to reduce opioid misuse shows that our proposal greatly enhances fair access to counseling.

stat.ML↗

arXiv2024

A New Paradigm for Counterfactual Reasoning in Fairness and Recourse

Counterfactuals and counterfactual reasoning underpin numerous techniques for auditing and understanding artificial intelligence (AI) systems. The traditional paradigm for counterfactual reasoning in this literature is the interventional counterfactual, where hypothetical interventions are imagined and simulated. For this reason, the starting point for causal reasoning about legal protections and demographic data in AI is an imagined intervention on a legally-protected characteristic, such as ethnicity, race, gender, disability, age, etc. We ask, for example, what would have happened had your race been different? An inherent limitation of this paradigm is that some demographic interventions -- like interventions on race -- may not translate into the formalisms of interventional counterfactuals. In this work, we explore a new paradigm based instead on the backtracking counterfactual, where rather than imagine hypothetical interventions on legally-protected characteristics, we imagine alternate initial conditions while holding these characteristics fixed. We ask instead, what would explain a counterfactual outcome for you as you actually are or could be? This alternate framework allows us to address many of the same social concerns, but to do so while asking fundamentally different questions that do not rely on demographic interventions.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2023

Causal Dependence Plots

Explaining artificial intelligence or machine learning models is increasingly important. To use such data-driven systems wisely we must understand how they interact with the world, including how they depend causally on data inputs. In this work we develop Causal Dependence Plots (CDPs) to visualize how one variable--an outcome--depends on changes in another variable--a predictor--$\textit{along with any consequent causal changes in other predictor variables}$. Crucially, CDPs differ from standard methods based on holding other predictors constant or assuming they are independent. CDPs make use of an auxiliary causal model because causal conclusions require causal assumptions. With simulations and real data experiments, we show CDPs can be combined in a modular way with methods for causal learning or sensitivity analysis. Since people often think causally about input-output dependence, CDPs can be powerful tools in the xAI or interpretable machine learning toolkit and contribute to applications like scientific machine learning and algorithmic fairness.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2022

Counterfactuals for the Future

Counterfactuals are often described as 'retrospective,' focusing on hypothetical alternatives to a realized past. This description relates to an often implicit assumption about the structure and stability of exogenous variables in the system being modeled -- an assumption that is reasonable in many settings where counterfactuals are used. In this work, we consider cases where we might reasonably make a different assumption about exogenous variables, namely, that the exogenous noise terms of each unit do exhibit some unit-specific structure and/or stability. This leads us to a different use of counterfactuals -- a 'forward-looking' rather than 'retrospective' counterfactual. We introduce "counterfactual treatment choice," a type of treatment choice problem that motivates using forward-looking counterfactuals. We then explore how mismatches between interventional versus forward-looking counterfactual approaches to treatment choice, consistent with different assumptions about exogenous noise, can lead to counterintuitive results.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2022

Disaggregated Interventions to Reduce Inequality

A significant body of research in the data sciences considers unfair discrimination against social categories such as race or gender that could occur or be amplified as a result of algorithmic decisions. Simultaneously, real-world disparities continue to exist, even before algorithmic decisions are made. In this work, we draw on insights from the social sciences brought into the realm of causal modeling and constrained optimization, and develop a novel algorithmic framework for tackling pre-existing real-world disparities. The purpose of our framework, which we call the "impact remediation framework," is to measure real-world disparities and discover the optimal intervention policies that could help improve equity or access to opportunity for those who are underserved with respect to an outcome of interest. We develop a disaggregated approach to tackling pre-existing disparities that relaxes the typical set of assumptions required for the use of social categories in structural causal models. Our approach flexibly incorporates counterfactuals and is compatible with various ontological assumptions about the nature of social categories. We demonstrate impact remediation with a hypothetical case study and compare our disaggregated approach to an existing state-of-the-art approach, comparing its structure and resulting policy recommendations. In contrast to most work on optimal policy learning, we explore disparity reduction itself as an objective, explicitly focusing the power of algorithms on reducing inequality.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2020

Causal intersectionality for fair ranking

In this paper we propose a causal modeling approach to intersectional fairness, and a flexible, task-specific method for computing intersectionally fair rankings. Rankings are used in many contexts, ranging from Web search results to college admissions, but causal inference for fair rankings has received limited attention. Additionally, the growing literature on causal fairness has directed little attention to intersectionality. By bringing these issues together in a formal causal framework we make the application of intersectionality in fair machine learning explicit, connected to important real world effects and domain knowledge, and transparent about technical limitations. We experimentally evaluate our approach on real and synthetic datasets, exploring its behaviour under different structural assumptions.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2018

Causal Interventions for Fairness

Most approaches in algorithmic fairness constrain machine learning methods so the resulting predictions satisfy one of several intuitive notions of fairness. While this may help private companies comply with non-discrimination laws or avoid negative publicity, we believe it is often too little, too late. By the time the training data is collected, individuals in disadvantaged groups have already suffered from discrimination and lost opportunities due to factors out of their control. In the present work we focus instead on interventions such as a new public policy, and in particular, how to maximize their positive effects while improving the fairness of the overall system. We use causal methods to model the effects of interventions, allowing for potential interference--each individual's outcome may depend on who else receives the intervention. We demonstrate this with an example of allocating a budget of teaching resources using a dataset of schools in New York City.

stat.ML↗

arXiv2018

Causal Reasoning for Algorithmic Fairness

In this work, we argue for the importance of causal reasoning in creating fair algorithms for decision making. We give a review of existing approaches to fairness, describe work in causality necessary for the understanding of causal approaches, argue why causality is necessary for any approach that wishes to be fair, and give a detailed analysis of the many recent approaches to causality-based fairness.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2018

Counterfactual Fairness

Machine learning can impact people with legal or ethical consequences when it is used to automate decisions in areas such as insurance, lending, hiring, and predictive policing. In many of these scenarios, previous decisions have been made that are unfairly biased against certain subpopulations, for example those of a particular race, gender, or sexual orientation. Since this past data may be biased, machine learning predictors must account for this to avoid perpetuating or creating discriminatory practices. In this paper, we develop a framework for modeling fairness using tools from causal inference. Our definition of counterfactual fairness captures the intuition that a decision is fair towards an individual if it is the same in (a) the actual world and (b) a counterfactual world where the individual belonged to a different demographic group. We demonstrate our framework on a real-world problem of fair prediction of success in law school.

stat.ML↗

arXiv2017

Selective inference with unknown variance via the square-root LASSO

There has been much recent work on inference after model selection when the noise level is known, however, $σ$ is rarely known in practice and its estimation is difficult in high-dimensional settings. In this work we propose using the square-root LASSO (also known as the scaled LASSO) to perform selective inference for the coefficients and the noise level simultaneously. The square-root LASSO has the property that choosing a reasonable tuning parameter is scale-free, namely it does not depend on the noise level in the data. We provide valid p-values and confidence intervals for the coefficients after selection, and estimates for model specific variance. Our estimates perform better than other estimates of $σ^2$ in simulation.

math.ST↗

arXiv2015

Selective inference after cross-validation

This paper describes a method for performing inference on models chosen by cross-validation. When the test error being minimized in cross-validation is a residual sum of squares it can be written as a quadratic form. This allows us to apply the inference framework in Loftus et al. (2015) for models determined by quadratic constraints to the model that minimizes CV test error. Our only requirement on the model training pro- cedure is that its selection events are regions satisfying linear or quadratic constraints. This includes both Lasso and forward stepwise, which serve as our main examples throughout. We do not require knowledge of the error variance $σ^2$. The procedures described here are computationally intensive methods of selecting models adaptively and performing inference for the selected model. Implementations are available in an R package.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2015

Selective inference in regression models with groups of variables

We provide a general mathematical framework for selective inference with supervised model selection procedures characterized by quadratic forms in the outcome variable. Forward stepwise with groups of variables is an important special case as it allows models with categorical variables or factors. Models can be chosen by AIC, BIC, or a fixed number of steps. We provide an exact significance test for each group of variables in the selected model based on an appropriately truncated $χ$ or $F$ distribution for the cases of known and unknown $σ^2$ respectively. An efficient software implementation is available as a package in the R statistical programming language.

stat.ME↗

arXiv2014

A significance test for forward stepwise model selection

We apply the methods developed by Lockhart et al. (2013) and Taylor et al. (2013) on significance tests for penalized regression to forward stepwise model selection. A general framework for selection procedures described by quadratic inequalities includes a variant of forward stepwise with grouped variables, allowing us to handle categorical variables and factor models. We provide an algorithm to compute a new statistic with an exact null distribution conditional on the outcome of the model selection procedure. This new statistic, which we denote $Tχ$, has a truncated $χ$ distribution under the global null. We apply this test in forward stepwise iteratively on the residual after each step. The resulting method has the computational strengths of stepwise selection and addresses the problem of invalid test statistics due to model selection. We illustrate the flexibility of this method by applying it to several specialized applications of forward stepwise including a hierarchical interactions model and a recently described additive model that adaptively chooses between linear and nonlinear effects for each variable.

stat.ME↗