Dataset Viewer
Auto-converted to Parquet Duplicate
Unnamed: 0
int64
DI
float64
KL
float64
W
float64
method
string
0
0.447046
0
0
Grad_reg_num
1
0.5
null
0.009512
Grad_reg_num
2
0.6
null
0.027283
Grad_reg_num
3
0.7
null
0.04488
Grad_reg_num
4
0.8
null
0.062406
Grad_reg_num
5
0.9
null
0.079546
Grad_reg_num
0
0.447046
0
0
Replace_SF
1
0.5
null
0.005
Replace_SF
2
0.6
null
0.0144
Replace_SF
3
0.7
null
0.0238
Replace_SF
4
0.8
null
0.0332
Replace_SF
5
0.9
null
0.0426
Replace_SF
0
0.447046
0
0
Gems_num
1
0.5
0.000663
0.027303
Gems_num
2
0.6
0.005311
0.078094
Gems_num
3
0.7
0.01408
0.127861
Gems_num
4
0.8
0.02681
0.176615
Gems_num
5
0.9
0.043645
0.224381
Gems_num
0
0.447046
0
0
Gems_mean
1
0.5
0.007751
0.114897
Gems_mean
2
0.6
0.04791
0.311217
Gems_mean
3
0.7
0.103794
0.484415
Gems_mean
4
0.8
0.16628
0.638368
Gems_mean
5
0.9
0.231104
0.776115
Gems_mean
0
0.447046
0
0
Grad_reg_mean
1
0.5
null
0.033928
Grad_reg_mean
2
0.6
null
0.09356
Grad_reg_mean
3
0.7
null
0.148606
Grad_reg_mean
4
0.8
null
0.205956
Grad_reg_mean
5
0.9
null
0.259781
Grad_reg_mean
0
0.447046
0
0
Grad_la_mean
1
0.5
null
0.03884
Grad_la_mean
2
0.6
null
0.104847
Grad_la_mean
3
0.7
null
0.17247
Grad_la_mean
4
0.8
null
0.234047
Grad_la_mean
5
0.9
null
0.301472
Grad_la_mean
0
0.447046
0
0
Grad_la_num
1
0.5
null
0.010503
Grad_la_num
2
0.6
null
0.031311
Grad_la_num
3
0.7
null
0.057952
Grad_la_num
4
0.8
null
0.07974
Grad_la_num
5
0.9
null
0.103329
Grad_la_num
0
0.447046
0
0
Sampling_X_cost
1
0.5
0.002102
0.005752
Sampling_X_cost
2
0.6
0.007093
0.018475
Sampling_X_cost
3
0.7
0.01253
0.032839
Sampling_X_cost
4
0.8
0.018268
0.047821
Sampling_X_cost
5
0.9
0.023218
0.063181
Sampling_X_cost

Exposing the Illusion of Fairness (EIF) Manipulations Results

We consider use cases where the auditee has developed a model which has fairness issues. It tries to hide the problem by picking a subsample while optimizing the fairness metric that will be computed by the auditor. Yet, from the supervisory authority, submitting a non-representative sample constitute a deceptive attempt by the auditee to obstruct or distort the assessment.

We present here the original empirical distribution (through the original dataset), and the manipulated distributions. From those manipulated distributions, we can study how to effectively detect the manipulation paradigm.

πŸ“Œ Overview

This dataset accompanies the paper:

Exposing the Illusion of Fairness (EIF): Auditing Vulnerabilities to Distributional Manipulation Attacks
https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.20708

HF Models repository: https://huggingface.co/ValentinLAFARGUE/EIF-biased-classifiers

Code repository:
https://github.com/ValentinLafargue/Inspection

It contains preprocessed tabular datasets, model outputs, and fairness-related quantities used to analyze bias and mitigation strategies. For each dataset, the original distribution is to be compared with the manipulated ones.

πŸ“Š Dataset Description

The dataset is organized by benchmark dataset, each containing multiple NumPy arrays:

  • Original data
  • Model predictions and thresholds
  • Fairness metrics (Disparate Impact)
  • Gradients and mitigation-related quantities

πŸ“ Structure

EIF-dataset/
β”œβ”€β”€ ADULT/
β”œβ”€β”€ ASC_INC/
β”œβ”€β”€ ASC_MOB/
β”œβ”€β”€ ASC_EMP/
β”œβ”€β”€ ASC_TRA/
β”œβ”€β”€ ASC_PUC/
β”œβ”€β”€ BAF/
└── CelebA/

Each folder contains .npy files such as:

  • original.npy β†’ original test dataset features (including S and ΕΆ)
  • DI.npy β†’ Disparate Impact values
  • acc.npy β†’ model accuracy
  • threshold.npy β†’ logits decision threshold
  • Miti_mod_SF.npy β†’ Distribution manipulation through the Replace (S,ΕΆ) method
  • Miti_sampling_X.npy β†’ Distribution manipulation through the Matching (X,S,ΕΆ) method
  • Miti_Gems_mean.npy β†’ Distribution manipulation through Gems (Entropic projection), proportional variant
  • Miti_Gems_number.npy β†’ Distribution manipulation through Gems (Entropic projection), balanced variant
  • Grad_reg_me.npy β†’ Distribution manipulation through Wasserstein gradient method, proportional variant
  • Grad_reg_nu.npy β†’ Distribution manipulation through Wasserstein gradient method, balanced variant
  • Grad_la_me.npy β†’ Distribution manipulation through Wasserstein gradient method, 1D-projection, proportional variant
  • Grad_la_nu.npy β†’ Distribution manipulation through Wasserstein gradient method, 1D-projection, balanced variant

πŸ“Š Datasets, Sensitive Attributes, and Disparate Impact

The Disparate Impact is the ratio of positive outcome rates between groups. The "groups" are defined, or separated using a so-called sensitive attribute, which is also called in legal texts a protected attribute.

Dataset Adult[1] INC[2] TRA[2] MOB[2] BAF[3] EMP[2] PUC[2]
Sensitive Attribute (S) Sex Sex Sex Age Age Disability Disability
Disparate Impact (DI) 0.30 0.67 0.69 0.45 0.35 0.30 0.32
[1]: Becker, B. and Kohavi, R. (1996). Adult. UCI Machine Learning Repository. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24432/C5XW20.306,
https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/uciml/adult-census-income.

[2]: Ding, F., Hardt, M., Miller, J., and Schmidt, L. (2021). Retiring adult: New datasets for fair machine learning. In Beygelzimer, A., Dauphin, Y., Liang, P., and Vaughan, J. W., editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems.313,
https://github.com/socialfoundations/folktables.

[3]: Jesus, S., Pombal, J., Alves, D., Cruz, A., Saleiro, P., Ribeiro, R. P., Gama, J., and Bizarro, P. (2022). Turning the tables: Biased, imbalanced, dynamic tabular datasets for ml evaluation. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems,
https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/sgpjesus/bank-account-fraud-dataset-neurips-2022.

🎯 Intended Use

We propose a methodology that simulate how stakeholders could try to evade an audit on the Disparate Impact ratio, without any liability. The auditee aims to construct a dataset whose distribution is optimally close to the distribution of the original data, while ensuring that the fairness measure is above a threshold, as required by the regulations. We provide here the results of the different manipulation strategies, which we later detect using distribution tests.

  • Analyzing auditing framework and vulnerability
  • Studying distribution manipulation strategies
  • Reproducing EIF experiments
  • Benchmarking distribution manipulation strategies
  • Benchmarking manipulation-proof strategies through statistical tests

⚠️ Limitations

  • Not intended for production use
  • Contains synthetic and manipulated data
  • Original classification performance is not optimized

βš–οΈ Ethical Considerations

This work studies how malicious actors could manipulate audit datasets to appear compliant with fairness metrics such as Disparate Impact. Our objective is to expose these vulnerabilities in order to strengthen auditing procedures and regulatory oversight. By analyzing both manipulation strategies and statistical detection methods, we aim to support the development of more robust fairness auditing frameworks.

It should be used for research and analysis only.


πŸš€ Usage

For a singular file:

path = hf_hub_download(
    repo_id="ValentinLAFARGUE/EIF-Manipulated-distributions",
    filename="ASC_INC/DI.npy",
    repo_type="dataset"
)

arr = np.load(path)

For all files:

from huggingface_hub import list_repo_files
files = list_repo_files("ValentinLAFARGUE/EIF-Manipulated-distributions", repo_type = "dataset")

dic_arr_results = {}
for file in files:
    if file[-4:] == '.npy':
        file_split = file.split('/')
        folder, subfile_name = file_split[0], file_split[1]
        path = hf_hub_download(
                repo_id="ValentinLAFARGUE/EIF-Manipulated-distributions",
                filename= file ,
                repo_type="dataset"
                )
        arr = np.load(path)
        try:
            dic_arr_results[folder][subfile_name[:-4]] = arr
        except:
            dic_arr_results[folder] = {}
            dic_arr_results[folder][subfile_name[:-4]] = arr
        print(f'successfuly loaded {file}')

πŸ“š Citation

@misc{lafargue2026exposingillusionfairnessauditing,
      title={Exposing the Illusion of Fairness: Auditing Vulnerabilities to Distributional Manipulation Attacks}, 
      author={Valentin Lafargue and Adriana Laurindo Monteiro and Emmanuelle Claeys and Laurent Risser and Jean-Michel Loubes},
      year={2026},
      eprint={2507.20708},
      url={https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.20708}, 
}
Downloads last month
9

Paper for ValentinLAFARGUE/EIF-Manipulated-distributions