Removing protected attributes rarely removes the social structure encoded by proxies and targets.
Bias in AI
Sources, impacts, and mitigation
What does it mean to mitigate bias when the institution itself is unequal?
The course returns to bias with the full data, metric, privacy, and accountability toolkit to compare mitigation strategies and their institutional limits.
Join the live roomBefore class
Bring one bias-mitigation proposal and state the causal mechanism it assumes.
After class
Rewrite it as an intervention plan with a metric, affected group, owner, monitoring signal, and appeal route.
The promise
By the end of this room…
- 01Diagnose structural, historical, measurement, model, and deployment bias.
- 02Compare pre-, in-, and post-processing mitigations.
- 03Test subgroup performance without reducing justice to a dashboard.
- 04Match a mitigation to a causal mechanism and an institutional duty.
Why this week now
Signals, not scene-setting.
A mitigation can improve one metric while worsening calibration, utility, burden, or legitimacy.
The repair target may be a workflow, target, or institution—not the model.
Run of show
Provoke → frame → work → argue → synthesize.
- 0:00provocation
Commit before the concepts
If race is removed from a model, is the resulting decision process less biased?
Live activity · week 6 opening - 0:15frame
Bias is a causal claim
Removing protected attributes rarely removes the social structure encoded by proxies and targets.
- 0:45discussion
Reading tension
Student leaders present the assigned readings as a clash of defensible positions, then moderate questions that expose the hidden assumptions.
- 1:10frame
Mitigation without metric shopping
A mitigation can improve one metric while worsening calibration, utility, burden, or legitimacy.
- 1:35break
Break
Ten minutes. Leave the room's unresolved question visible.
- 1:45forensics
Obermeyer proxy autopsy
Role-based groups work the anchor case through technical, legal, stakeholder, and normative lenses.
Deliverable · A two-minute finding with evidence, uncertainty, and an actionable remedy.Live activity · week 6 forensics - 2:25controversy
Fairness-metric stakeholder role-play
Assigned positions, side-switch, and a joint recommendation that names the value or stakeholder it leaves exposed.
Live activity · week 6 controversy - 2:50synthesis
Re-vote and leave a trace
Repeat the opening vote, inspect what moved, and submit the strongest argument you still reject.
Live activity · week 6 exit
Case room
Evidence before opinion.
Obermeyer healthcare algorithm
Why was changing the target more direct than removing race?
Gender Shades
What did intersectional evaluation reveal that aggregate accuracy hid?
SafeRent
Which omitted fact and workflow handoff had the greatest causal leverage?
Reading stack
Read the tension, not the bibliography.
- 01CoreDissecting racial bias in a health-care algorithm ↗
Obermeyer et al.
- 02CoreGender Shades ↗
Buolamwini & Gebru
Evidence ledger
Every case has a receipt.
4 primary, scholarly, or first-party sources
Dissecting racial bias in an algorithm used to manage the health of populations
Shows how healthcare cost became a distorted proxy for health need because access was unequal.
Peer-reviewed audit ↗Gender Shades: Intersectional Accuracy Disparities
The foundational intersectional audit of commercial gender-classification systems.
Peer-reviewed audit ↗Louis et al. v. SafeRent Solutions et al.
A tenant-screening case involving omitted vouchers, credit proxies, disparate impact, and vendor responsibility.
Court and regulatory case record ↗A Framework for Understanding Sources of Harm throughout the Machine Learning Life Cycle
Separates historical, representation, measurement, aggregation, evaluation, and deployment harms.
Research framework ↗