Assessing Predictive Models for Fairness Based on Activity-Space Patterns
Updated 5 h ago · first seen 11 Sept 2026
paper_01M294FS7F237W2CKHY5YWK996
- Published
- 11 Sept 2026
- T1 · 5 h ago
- arXiv
- 2605.23234
- T1 · 5 h ago
- Category
- cs.LG
- T1 · 5 h ago
Abstract
Assessing the spatial fairness of predictive models involves establishing whether they are statistically penalizing (favoring) individuals associated with certain geographical locations. Literature on this topic makes the fundamental assumption that each individual is assigned to a single geographical location (e.g., place of residence). However, fairness with respect to the set of regions where one regularly spends time, i.e., the individual's activity space, also matters when fairness is considered. Consequently, we argue that it is necessary to generalize the notion of spatial fairness to also account for such activity-space patterns, leading to the novel problem of assessing predictive models for fairness relative to the movements of individuals. To deal with this problem, we propose an approach that first associates individuals with geographic regions relevant to their activity spaces, considering multiple spatial partitions with different resolutions and alignments, and then employs a suitable spatial scan statistic to assess whether a predictive model is fair based on activity-space patterns. In the experimental evaluation, we study the performance of our approach over thousands of synthetic unfair datasets, showing that it is effective at detecting this new type of unfairness and at retrieving the set of objects treated unfairly, while localization performance exhibits a consistent multi-resolution trade-off.
Authors 4
Francesco Lettich, Mario A. Nascimento, Chiara Pugliese, Chiara Renso
Specification
- Official page
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 5 h agohigh
- Arxiv announce type
- replace
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 5 h agohigh
- arXiv id
- 2605.23234
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 5 h agohigh
- Categories
- cs.LG, cs.CY
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 5 h agohigh
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 5 h agohigh
- Primary category
- cs.LG
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 5 h agohigh
- Published
- 11 Sept 2026
Source:arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1observed 5 h agohigh
Each value shows its source, tier and observation time. Conflicting claims are kept side by side and flagged — never averaged. How AI Atlas records facts →
Provenance
Attributed facts
9
Source tiers
T19
Freshest observation
5 h ago
Conflicts
None
No models linked to this paper yet.
As of
Rewind the record: see this entity's attributes exactly as AI Atlas knew them on a given day.
Claim history · Abstract
Abstractabstract1
| Value | Valid from → to | Status | Source | Confidence | Extractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assessing the spatial fairness of predictive models involves establishing whether they are statistically penalizing (favoring) individuals associated with certain geographical locations. Literature on this topic makes the fundamental assumption that each individual is assigned to a single geographical location (e.g., place of residence). However, fairness with respect to the set of regions where one regularly spends time, i.e., the individual's activity space, also matters when fairness is considered. Consequently, we argue that it is necessary to generalize the notion of spatial fairness to also account for such activity-space patterns, leading to the novel problem of assessing predictive models for fairness relative to the movements of individuals. To deal with this problem, we propose an approach that first associates individuals with geographic regions relevant to their activity spaces, considering multiple spatial partitions with different resolutions and alignments, and then employs a suitable spatial scan statistic to assess whether a predictive model is fair based on activity-space patterns. In the experimental evaluation, we study the performance of our approach over thousands of synthetic unfair datasets, showing that it is effective at detecting this new type of unfairness and at retrieving the set of objects treated unfairly, while localization performance exhibits a consistent multi-resolution trade-off. | → current | current | arXiv (Atom API + RSS)T1 | high | deterministic |
Claims are temporal and append-only: a new observation closes the previous claim (valid_to) instead of overwriting it. Conflicting claims from different sources are kept side by side and flagged — never averaged. Methodology →
New paper: Assessing Predictive Models for Fairness Based on Activity-Space Patterns
arxiv
| Source | Document | Type | Tier | Last observed | Snapshots |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| arXiv (Atom API + RSS) | rss.arxiv.org/rss/cs.LG | feed | T1· Official | 3 h ago | 1 |
Tier 1 = official/primary, 2 = quality secondary, 3 = community, 4 = unverified. Every snapshot is archived; see all sources and the methodology.