You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
According to your definitions Predicted Positive Ratio k is PPR and Predicted Positive Ratio g is PPrev. So Aequitas defines Statistical Parity as PPR Parity That is not the definition according to Verma & Rubin 2018, who say Statistical Parity was PPrev Parity. Then again, if taking Statistical Parity synonymous to Demographic Parity, your definition of it being PPR Parity makes more sense I think.
So, any thoughts on this?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Here: https://github.com/dssg/aequitas/blob/master/docs/source/examples/compas_demo.ipynb
Under "How do I assess model fairness?" > "Pairities Calcuated" it sais
According to your definitions Predicted Positive Ratio k is PPR and Predicted Positive Ratio g is PPrev. So Aequitas defines Statistical Parity as PPR Parity That is not the definition according to Verma & Rubin 2018, who say Statistical Parity was PPrev Parity. Then again, if taking Statistical Parity synonymous to Demographic Parity, your definition of it being PPR Parity makes more sense I think.
So, any thoughts on this?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: