论文标题
追求犯罪累犯预测的可解释,公平,准确的机器学习
In Pursuit of Interpretable, Fair and Accurate Machine Learning for Criminal Recidivism Prediction
论文作者
论文摘要
目标:我们使用机器学习(ML)模型研究可解释的累犯预测,并根据预测能力,稀疏性和公平性分析性能。与以前的作品不同,本研究训练可解释的模型,这些模型输出概率而不是二进制预测,并使用定量公平定义来评估模型。这项研究还检查了模型是否可以跨越地理位置进行概括。方法:我们在佛罗里达和肯塔基州的两个不同的犯罪累犯数据集上生成了黑盒和可解释的ML模型。我们将这些模型的预测性能和公平性与目前在司法系统中使用的两种方法进行了预测预测审前累犯:Arnold PSA和Compas。我们评估了所有模型的预测性能,以预测两次跨度的六种不同类型的犯罪。结果:几种可解释的ML模型可以预测累犯和黑盒ML模型,并且比Compas或Arnold PSA更准确。这些模型在实践中可能有用。与Arnold PSA相似,其中一些可解释的模型可以写入简单的表格。其他可以使用一组可视化来显示。我们的地理分析表明,应分别培训ML模型,并随着时间的推移进行更新。我们还为可解释的模型提供了公平分析。结论:就预测准确性和公平性而言,可解释的机器学习模型也可以执行不可解剖的方法和当前使用的风险评估量表。当分别培训不同的位置并保持最新的培训时,机器学习模型可能会更准确。
Objectives: We study interpretable recidivism prediction using machine learning (ML) models and analyze performance in terms of prediction ability, sparsity, and fairness. Unlike previous works, this study trains interpretable models that output probabilities rather than binary predictions, and uses quantitative fairness definitions to assess the models. This study also examines whether models can generalize across geographic locations. Methods: We generated black-box and interpretable ML models on two different criminal recidivism datasets from Florida and Kentucky. We compared predictive performance and fairness of these models against two methods that are currently used in the justice system to predict pretrial recidivism: the Arnold PSA and COMPAS. We evaluated predictive performance of all models on predicting six different types of crime over two time spans. Results: Several interpretable ML models can predict recidivism as well as black-box ML models and are more accurate than COMPAS or the Arnold PSA. These models are potentially useful in practice. Similar to the Arnold PSA, some of these interpretable models can be written down as a simple table. Others can be displayed using a set of visualizations. Our geographic analysis indicates that ML models should be trained separately for separate locations and updated over time. We also present a fairness analysis for the interpretable models. Conclusions: Interpretable machine learning models can perform just as well as non-interpretable methods and currently-used risk assessment scales, in terms of both prediction accuracy and fairness. Machine learning models might be more accurate when trained separately for distinct locations and kept up-to-date.