Downloads provided by UsageCounts
handle: 11583/2974778
In this document we provide three appendixes for the journal article “Identifying Imbalance Thresholds in Input Data to Achieve Desired Levels of Algorithmic Fairness”. In Appendix A we show predictors and targets that we took into account for each dataset employed in our study. In Appendix B we describe the configurations of the thresholds that we defined during the procedure of Identification of Risk Thresholds. In Appendix C, for each combination of balance-unfairness-algorithm we report the best thresholds selected by accuracy, the configuration they correspond to (among the 5 options described in Appendix B), and all the evaluation metrics related to those thresholds.
Algorithmic fairness, Data bias; Data imbalance; Algorithmic fairness; Risk analysis; Automated decision-making, Data imbalance, Risk analysis, Automated decision-making, Data bias, Data ethics
Algorithmic fairness, Data bias; Data imbalance; Algorithmic fairness; Risk analysis; Automated decision-making, Data imbalance, Risk analysis, Automated decision-making, Data bias, Data ethics
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
| downloads | 2 |

Downloads provided by UsageCounts