Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Existing work in fairness audits assumes that agents operate independently. In this paper, we consider the case of multiple agents auditing the same platform for different tasks. Agents have two levers: their collaboration strategy, with or without coordination beforehand, and their sampling method. We theoretically study their interplay when agents operate independently or collaborate. We prove that, surprisingly, coordination can sometimes be detrimental to audit accuracy, whereas uncoordinated collaboration generally yields good results. Experimentation on real-world datasets confirms this observation, as the audit accuracy of uncoordinated collaboration matches that of collaborative optimal sampling.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vos et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: