CAFP: A Post-Processing Framework for Group Fairness via Counterfactual Model Averaging
Ensuring fairness in machine learning predictions is a critical challenge, especially when models are deployed in sensitive domains such as credit scoring, healthcare, and criminal justice. While many fairness interventions rely on data preprocessing or algorithmic constraints during training, these approaches often require full control over the model architecture and access to protected attribute information, which may not be feasible in real-world systems. In this paper, we propose Counterfact
Record details
Published: 8 April 2026
Source: arXiv
Category: Research
Topics: Bias & fairness · Healthcare
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.
Evaluating Intersectional Fairness across Clinical Machine Learning Use Cases using Fairlogue and the All of Us Research Program
arXiv · 7 April 2026
PriHA: A RAG-Enhanced LLM Framework for Primary Healthcare Assistant in Hong Kong
arXiv · 10 April 2026
Edu-MMBias: A Three-Tier Multimodal Benchmark for Auditing Social Bias in Vision-Language Models under Educational Contexts
arXiv · 11 April 2026
Evaluating the Impact of Medical Image Reconstruction on Downstream AI Fairness and Performance
arXiv · 13 April 2026
A Scoping Review of LLM-as-a-Judge in Healthcare and the MedJUDGE Framework
arXiv · 3 April 2026
A Multi-Domain Red Teaming Framework for Safety, Robustness, and Fairness Evaluation of Medical Large Language Models
arXiv · 15 April 2026
How to cite this record
ethics.ai (8 April 2026), “CAFP: A Post-Processing Framework for Group Fairness via Counterfactual Model Averaging,” evidence record 6193, https://ethics.ai/record/6193 (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.