Robustness Within a Fairness Budget: Parity Frontiers and Equal-Opportunity Reversal
Pablo Rivas ⋅ Jeremy Frank
Abstract
Adversarial training protects predictive performance under attack but does not determine how decisions are distributed across protected groups. We formulate binary classification as projected gradient descent (PGD) adversarial-risk minimization under a squared soft demographic-parity (DP) budget, optimized with projected multiplier and one-sided penalty updates. On Adult Income, using the binary \texttt{sex} field supplied by the benchmark for group auditing but excluding it from prediction, we test logistic regression and a one-hidden-layer multilayer perceptron (MLP) across three paired seeds, four PGD strengths, and five budgets. At $\varepsilon=0.3$, PGD training improves balanced accuracy over empirical-risk minimization (ERM) by $7.77$ and $11.45$ percentage points and removes $85.7\%$ and $89.5\%$ of attack-induced growth in hard demographic-parity difference (DPD). At the representative interior value $\tau=0.015$, constrained training cuts DPD relative to PGD training by $52.2\%$ and $49.2\%$, while remaining $3.18$ and $8.34$ balanced-accuracy points above ERM. Across all eight seed-averaged model--attack paths, the sampled budget path strictly orders DPD and accuracy and reverses mean signed equal-opportunity difference (EOpp). A rate theorem gives the exact true-positive-rate shift required for reversal, and the measured group rates satisfy it. Within this controlled feature-space study, robustness and parity admit useful joint operating points, but one fairness metric cannot replace a full group-rate audit.
Chat is not available.
Successful Page Load