Is Fairness Truly Fair? Towards Reliable Lipschitz Fairness in Multi-Task Learning via Fixed-\texorpdfstring{$δ$}{delta} Alignment
Lipschitz-style individual fairness formalizes the idea that semantically similar examples should receive similar predictions, but its evaluation in multi-task learning (MTL) can be confounded by method-induced representation scales. This paper identifies threshold confounding: when the auditing tolerance is derived from each model's own representation distances, different algorithms are compared under different semantic thresholds. A threshold-drift analysis further shows how Bias rankings can
Record details
Published: 9 June 2026
Source: arXiv
Category: Research
Topics: Bias & fairness · Safety & alignment · Transparency
Retrieved: 14 July 2026
Related evidence
These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.
Two Wrongs, No Right: Auditing Social-Desirability Bias in LLM Annotators for Computational Social Science
arXiv · 12 May 2026
X-FEMR: A Token-level Explainable Approach for Electronic Health Records Foundation Models using Transformer-based Models
arXiv · 7 July 2026
Trustworthy Machine Learning through the Lens of Combinatorial Optimization: Survey and Research Perspectives
arXiv fairness query · 8 July 2026
Taming Actor-Observer Asymmetry in Agents via Dialectical Alignment
arXiv · 21 April 2026
Prompt Programming for Cultural Bias and Alignment of Large Language Models
arXiv · 17 March 2026
Explaining Explanations: An Overview of Interpretability of Machine Learning
OpenAlex · 1 October 2018
How to cite this record
ethics.ai (9 June 2026), “Is Fairness Truly Fair? Towards Reliable Lipschitz Fairness in Multi-Task Learning via Fixed-\texorpdfstring{$δ$}{delta} Alignment,” evidence record 1208, https://ethics.ai/record/1208 (originally published by arXiv).
Use and limitations
This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.