Abstract

Weak supervision overcomes the label bottleneck, enabling efficient development of training sets. Millions of models trained on such datasets have been deployed in the real world and interact with users on a daily basis. However, the techniques that make weak supervision attractive—such as integrating any source of signal to estimate unknown labels—also ensure that the pseudolabels it produces are highly biased. Surprisingly, given everyday use and the potential for increased bias, weak supervision has not been studied from the point of view of fairness. This work begins such a study. Our departure point is the observation that even when a fair model can be built from a dataset with access to ground-truth labels, the corresponding dataset labeled via weak supervision can be arbitrarily unfair. Fortunately, not all is lost: we propose and empirically validate a model for source unfairness in weak supervision, then introduce a simple counterfactual fairness-based technique that can mitigate these biases. Theoretically, we show that it is possible for our approach to simultaneously improve both accuracy and fairness metrics—in contrast to standard fairness approaches that suffer from tradeoffs. Empirically, we show that our technique improves accuracy on weak supervision baselines by as much as 32% while reducing demographic parity gap by 82.5%.