AI Navigate

No evaluation without fair representation : Impact of label and selection bias on the evaluation, performance and mitigation of classification models

arXiv cs.LG / 3/11/2026

Ideas & Deep AnalysisModels & Research

Key Points

  • The paper investigates how label bias and various subtypes of selection bias independently impact the evaluation and performance of classification models and the efficacy of bias mitigation methods.
  • It introduces a biasing and evaluation framework that simulates fair and biased conditions in real-life datasets, allowing more representative model evaluations compared to traditional biased test sets.
  • Findings reveal that there is no trade-off between fairness and accuracy or between individual and group fairness when models are tested on unbiased data.
  • The effectiveness of bias mitigation methods depends on the specific type of bias present in the dataset, highlighting the need for tailored mitigation strategies.
  • The study calls for further research on more accurate evaluation protocols, more complex bias combinations, and the influence of dataset characteristics on mitigation efficiency.

Computer Science > Machine Learning

arXiv:2603.09662 (cs)
[Submitted on 10 Mar 2026]

Title:No evaluation without fair representation : Impact of label and selection bias on the evaluation, performance and mitigation of classification models

View a PDF of the paper titled No evaluation without fair representation : Impact of label and selection bias on the evaluation, performance and mitigation of classification models, by Magali Legast and 2 other authors
View PDF HTML (experimental)
Abstract:Bias can be introduced in diverse ways in machine learning datasets, for example via selection or label bias. Although these bias types in themselves have an influence on important aspects of fair machine learning, their different impact has been understudied. In this work, we empirically analyze the effect of label bias and several subtypes of selection bias on the evaluation of classification models, on their performance, and on the effectiveness of bias mitigation methods. We also introduce a biasing and evaluation framework that allows to model fair worlds and their biased counterparts through the introduction of controlled bias in real-life datasets with low discrimination. Using our framework, we empirically analyze the impact of each bias type independently, while obtaining a more representative evaluation of models and mitigation methods than with the traditional use of a subset of biased data as test set. Our results highlight different factors that influence how impactful bias is on model performance. They also show an absence of trade-off between fairness and accuracy, and between individual and group fairness, when models are evaluated on a test set that does not exhibit unwanted bias. They furthermore indicate that the performance of bias mitigation methods is influenced by the type of bias present in the data. Our findings call for future work to develop more accurate evaluations of prediction models and fairness interventions, but also to better understand other types of bias, more complex scenarios involving the combination of different bias types, and other factors that impact the efficiency of the mitigation methods, such as dataset characteristics.
Comments:
Subjects: Machine Learning (cs.LG)
Cite as: arXiv:2603.09662 [cs.LG]
  (or arXiv:2603.09662v1 [cs.LG] for this version)
  https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2603.09662
Focus to learn more
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

Submission history

From: Magali Legast [view email]
[v1] Tue, 10 Mar 2026 13:34:53 UTC (1,417 KB)
Full-text links:

Access Paper:

    View a PDF of the paper titled No evaluation without fair representation : Impact of label and selection bias on the evaluation, performance and mitigation of classification models, by Magali Legast and 2 other authors
  • View PDF
  • HTML (experimental)
  • TeX Source
Current browse context:
cs.LG
< prev   |   next >
Change to browse by:
cs

References & Citations

export BibTeX citation Loading...

BibTeX formatted citation

×
Data provided by:

Bookmark

BibSonomy logo Reddit logo
Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers Toggle
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps Toggle
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite.ai Toggle
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle
alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)
Links to Code Toggle
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub Toggle
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
GotitPub Toggle
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Huggingface Toggle
Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)
Links to Code Toggle
Papers with Code (What is Papers with Code?)
ScienceCast Toggle
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)
Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle
Replicate (What is Replicate?)
Spaces Toggle
Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)
Spaces Toggle
TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)
Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower
Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
Core recommender toggle
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
IArxiv recommender toggle
IArxiv Recommender (What is IArxiv?)
About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.