No abstract

Ride hailing platforms, such as Uber, Lyft, Ola or DiDi, have traditionally focused on the satisfaction of the passengers, or on boosting successful business transactions. However, recent studies provide a multitude of reasons to worry about the drivers in the ride hailing ecosystem. The concerns range from bad working conditions and worker manipulation to discrimination against minorities. With the sharing economy ecosystem growing, more and more drivers financially depend on online platforms and their algorithms to secure a living. It is pertinent to ask what a fair distribution of income on such platforms is and what power and means the platform has in shaping these distributions.In this paper, we analyze job assignments of a major taxi company and observe that there is significant inequality in the driver income distribution. We propose a novel framework to think about fairness in the matching mechanisms of ride hailing platforms. Specifically, our notion of fairness relies on the idea that, spread over time, all drivers should receive benefits proportional to the amount of time they are active in the platform. We postulate that by not requiring every match to be fair, but rather distributing fairness over time, we can achieve better overall benefit for the drivers and the passengers. We experiment with various optimization problems and heuristics to explore the means of achieving two-sided fairness, and investigate their caveats and side-effects. Overall, our work takes the first step towards rethinking fairness in ride hailing platforms with an additional emphasis on the well-being of drivers.

In this work, we de ne and solve the Fair Top-k Ranking problem, in which we want to determine a subset of k candidates from a large pool of n k candidates, maximizing utility (i.e., select the "best" candidates) subject to group fairness criteria.Our ranked group fairness de nition extends group fairness using the standard notion of protected groups and is based on ensuring that the proportion of protected candidates in every pre x of the top-k ranking remains statistically above or indistinguishable from a given minimum. Utility is operationalized in two ways: (i) every candidate included in the top-k should be more quali ed than every candidate not included; and (ii) for every pair of candidates in the top-k, the more quali ed candidate should be ranked above.An e cient algorithm is presented for producing the Fair Top-k Ranking, and tested experimentally on existing datasets as well as new datasets released with this paper, showing that our approach yields small distortions with respect to rankings that maximize utility without considering fairness criteria. To the best of our knowledge, this is the rst algorithm grounded in statistical tests that can mitigate biases in the representation of an under-represented group along a ranked list.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Ranked search results and recommendations have become the main mechanism by which we find content, products, places, and people online. With hiring, selecting, purchasing, and dating being increasingly mediated by algorithms, rankings may determine career and business opportunities, educational placement, access to benefits, and even social and reproductive success. It is therefore of societal and ethical importance to ask whether search results can demote, marginalize, or exclude individuals of unprivileged groups or promote products with undesired features.In this paper we present FairSearch, the first fair open source search API to provide fairness notions in ranked search results. We implement two algorithms from the fair ranking literature, namely FA*IR (Zehlike et al., 2017) and DELTR (Zehlike and Castillo, 2018) and provide them as stand-alone libraries in Python and Java. Additionally we implement interfaces to Elasticsearch for both algorithms, that use the aforementioned Java libraries and are then provided as Elasticsearch plugins. Elasticsearch is a well-known search engine API based on Apache Lucene. With our plugins we enable search engine developers who wish to ensure fair search results of different styles to easily integrate DELTR and FA*IR into their existing Elasticsearch environment.

In the past few years, there has been much work on incorporating fairness requirements into algorithmic rankers, with contributions coming from the data management, algorithms, information retrieval, and recommender systems communities. In this survey we give a systematic overview of this work, offering a broad perspective that connects formalizations and algorithmic approaches across subfields. An important contribution of our work is in developing a common narrative around the value frameworks that motivate specific fairness-enhancing interventions in ranking. This allows us to unify the presentation of mitigation objectives and of algorithmic techniques to help meet those objectives or identify trade-offs. In this first part of this survey, we describe four classification frameworks for fairness-enhancing interventions, along which we relate the technical methods surveyed in this paper, discuss evaluation datasets, and present technical work on fairness in score-based ranking. In the second part of this survey, we present methods that incorporate fairness in supervised learning, and also give representative examples of recent work on fairness in recommendation and matchmaking systems. We also discuss evaluation frameworks for fair score-based ranking and fair learning-to-rank, and draw a set of recommendations for the evaluation of fair ranking methods.