Evaluating Fairness in Transaction Fraud Models: Fairness Metrics, Bias Audits, and Challenges

Ensuring fairness in transaction fraud detection models is vital due to the potential harms and legal implications of biased decision-making. Despite extensive research on algorithmic fairness, there is a notable gap in the study of bias in fraud detection models, mainly due to the field's uniq...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors Kamalaruban, Parameswaran, Pi, Yulu, Burrell, Stuart, Drage, Eleanor, Skalski, Piotr, Wong, Jason, Sutton, David
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published 06.09.2024
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
Abstract Ensuring fairness in transaction fraud detection models is vital due to the potential harms and legal implications of biased decision-making. Despite extensive research on algorithmic fairness, there is a notable gap in the study of bias in fraud detection models, mainly due to the field's unique challenges. These challenges include the need for fairness metrics that account for fraud data's imbalanced nature and the tradeoff between fraud protection and service quality. To address this gap, we present a comprehensive fairness evaluation of transaction fraud models using public synthetic datasets, marking the first algorithmic bias audit in this domain. Our findings reveal three critical insights: (1) Certain fairness metrics expose significant bias only after normalization, highlighting the impact of class imbalance. (2) Bias is significant in both service quality-related parity metrics and fraud protection-related parity metrics. (3) The fairness through unawareness approach, which involved removing sensitive attributes such as gender, does not improve bias mitigation within these datasets, likely due to the presence of correlated proxies. We also discuss socio-technical fairness-related challenges in transaction fraud models. These insights underscore the need for a nuanced approach to fairness in fraud detection, balancing protection and service quality, and moving beyond simple bias mitigation strategies. Future work must focus on refining fairness metrics and developing methods tailored to the unique complexities of the transaction fraud domain.
AbstractList Ensuring fairness in transaction fraud detection models is vital due to the potential harms and legal implications of biased decision-making. Despite extensive research on algorithmic fairness, there is a notable gap in the study of bias in fraud detection models, mainly due to the field's unique challenges. These challenges include the need for fairness metrics that account for fraud data's imbalanced nature and the tradeoff between fraud protection and service quality. To address this gap, we present a comprehensive fairness evaluation of transaction fraud models using public synthetic datasets, marking the first algorithmic bias audit in this domain. Our findings reveal three critical insights: (1) Certain fairness metrics expose significant bias only after normalization, highlighting the impact of class imbalance. (2) Bias is significant in both service quality-related parity metrics and fraud protection-related parity metrics. (3) The fairness through unawareness approach, which involved removing sensitive attributes such as gender, does not improve bias mitigation within these datasets, likely due to the presence of correlated proxies. We also discuss socio-technical fairness-related challenges in transaction fraud models. These insights underscore the need for a nuanced approach to fairness in fraud detection, balancing protection and service quality, and moving beyond simple bias mitigation strategies. Future work must focus on refining fairness metrics and developing methods tailored to the unique complexities of the transaction fraud domain.
Author Kamalaruban, Parameswaran
Skalski, Piotr
Sutton, David
Drage, Eleanor
Wong, Jason
Burrell, Stuart
Pi, Yulu
Author_xml – sequence: 1
  givenname: Parameswaran
  surname: Kamalaruban
  fullname: Kamalaruban, Parameswaran
– sequence: 2
  givenname: Yulu
  surname: Pi
  fullname: Pi, Yulu
– sequence: 3
  givenname: Stuart
  surname: Burrell
  fullname: Burrell, Stuart
– sequence: 4
  givenname: Eleanor
  surname: Drage
  fullname: Drage, Eleanor
– sequence: 5
  givenname: Piotr
  surname: Skalski
  fullname: Skalski, Piotr
– sequence: 6
  givenname: Jason
  surname: Wong
  fullname: Wong, Jason
– sequence: 7
  givenname: David
  surname: Sutton
  fullname: Sutton, David
BackLink https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2409.04373$$DView paper in arXiv
BookMark eNqFzrsOgkAQheEttPD2AFbOAyiuAvHSKYHY0FFLJrDiJOtgdheib68SE0urk5P8xTcUPa5ZCTFdSS_YhqFconlQ660DufNk4G_8gTjHLeoGHXEFCZJhZS0QQ2aQLRaOaobEYFNCWpdK2_2vSpUzVNg5HAktHJqS3PsglxBdUWvFlbJj0b-gtmry3ZGYJXEWnRadJL8buqF55h9R3on8_8UL9qRCxA
ContentType Journal Article
Copyright http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
Copyright_xml – notice: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
DBID AKY
GOX
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2409.04373
DatabaseName arXiv Computer Science
arXiv.org
DatabaseTitleList
Database_xml – sequence: 1
  dbid: GOX
  name: arXiv.org
  url: http://arxiv.org/find
  sourceTypes: Open Access Repository
DeliveryMethod fulltext_linktorsrc
ExternalDocumentID 2409_04373
GroupedDBID AKY
GOX
ID FETCH-arxiv_primary_2409_043733
IEDL.DBID GOX
IngestDate Tue Sep 10 12:20:23 EDT 2024
IsDoiOpenAccess true
IsOpenAccess true
IsPeerReviewed false
IsScholarly false
Language English
LinkModel DirectLink
MergedId FETCHMERGED-arxiv_primary_2409_043733
OpenAccessLink https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.04373
ParticipantIDs arxiv_primary_2409_04373
PublicationCentury 2000
PublicationDate 2024-09-06
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD 2024-09-06
PublicationDate_xml – month: 09
  year: 2024
  text: 2024-09-06
  day: 06
PublicationDecade 2020
PublicationYear 2024
Score 3.8571198
SecondaryResourceType preprint
Snippet Ensuring fairness in transaction fraud detection models is vital due to the potential harms and legal implications of biased decision-making. Despite extensive...
SourceID arxiv
SourceType Open Access Repository
SubjectTerms Computer Science - Learning
Title Evaluating Fairness in Transaction Fraud Models: Fairness Metrics, Bias Audits, and Challenges
URI https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.04373
hasFullText 1
inHoldings 1
isFullTextHit
isPrint
link http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwdV1NT8MwDLW2nbggJkDj2weOBEqbpttuY1qZkAaXIfVElbQJqoQq1G6In4-TdiqXHZNYkeVEsa3Y7wHcGkkXQ3uGSSME4xSUMqXGAfNyHXmR4coTtjl59SqW7_wlCZMe4K4XRla_xU-DD6zqB3I3k3uHvtOHvu_bkq3nt6T5nHRQXK18J0cxppv65yTiIzhsozucNccxhJ4uj-Fj0SJql58Yy6KyjwsWJa47qm6k-HGboyUm-6qnndTK8l1l9R0-FbLGme2goAEl_zjfkaDUJ3ATL9bzJXMapd8NfERqlU2dssEpDCjJ1yNA5Sv1KMUkCozhxiMTCuNrzcMoDzOejc9gtG-X8_1LF3DgkxN2NVHiEgabaquvyIlu1LWz5B-kbndb
link.rule.ids 228,230,786,891
linkProvider Cornell University
openUrl ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluating+Fairness+in+Transaction+Fraud+Models%3A+Fairness+Metrics%2C+Bias+Audits%2C+and+Challenges&rft.au=Kamalaruban%2C+Parameswaran&rft.au=Pi%2C+Yulu&rft.au=Burrell%2C+Stuart&rft.au=Drage%2C+Eleanor&rft.date=2024-09-06&rft_id=info:doi/10.48550%2Farxiv.2409.04373&rft.externalDocID=2409_04373