How to investigate bias while preserving model accuracy?
You work for a telecommunications company. You’re building a model to predict which customers may fail to pay their next phone bill. The purpose of this model is to proactively offer at-risk customers assistance such as service discounts and bill deadline extensions. The data is stored in BigQuery and the predictive features that are available for model training include: - Customer_id - Age - Salary (measured in local currency) - Sex - Average bill value (measured in local currency) - Number of phone calls in the last month (integer) - Average duration of phone calls (measured in minutes) You need to investigate and mitigate potential bias against disadvantaged groups, while preserving model accuracy. What should you do?
Community Votes
100% of anonymous learners picked answer D. Votes are pick records left by other test-takers — they are not the verified answer.
Community Insight
The correct approach is to measure fairness using a defined metric on a test set containing sensitive attributes, rather than excluding features based on correlation or global importance scores.
To investigate and mitigate bias without sacrificing accuracy, define a fairness metric (like accuracy parity) and evaluate the model on a test set joined with sensitive features. This allows for the quantification of bias across groups before deciding on mitigation strategies.
Selecting Option A is a common error because removing features correlated with sensitive attributes (fairness through unawareness) often reduces model accuracy and fails to address bias effectively.
Community Discussion (5 comments)
Comments & Corrections
No comments yet — spotted an error or have a note? Share it below.
Expert Analysis
Why the Answer Is Correct
Option D is the best approach because it follows the standard workflow for Responsible AI: define a quantifiable fairness metric relevant to the context, train the model, and then evaluate its performance specifically against that metric using a test set that includes sensitive attributes. This method allows you to directly measure if the model is disadvantaged for specific groups without arbitrarily removing data that might be crucial for maintaining model accuracy.Why the Other Options Are Wrong
Option A is incorrect because excluding sensitive features and their proxies (correlated features) is a technique known as 'fairness through unawareness,' which often fails to mitigate bias and significantly degrades model accuracy. Option B is incorrect because global feature importance (ML.GLOBAL_EXPLAIN) indicates a feature's overall contribution to the model, not whether it causes disparate performance across demographic groups. Option C is incorrect because local explanations (ML.EXPLAIN_PREDICT) explain individual predictions, and discarding a model based on a single customer's attribution values is not a valid strategy for assessing group-level fairness.Community Comment Notes
The community consensus strongly supports Option D, emphasizing that it allows for a direct bias assessment and preserves information by avoiding premature feature removal. Several comments referenced Google Cloud documentation on evaluation and fairness, which validates the approach of defining metrics and evaluating on test sets. While one comment suggested Option A, it received no support and contradicts the requirement to preserve accuracy.Official Reference
Exam Strategy
When answering questions about bias, prioritize options that involve defining a specific fairness metric and evaluating the model on a test set with sensitive attributes over options that suggest deleting features or using only global/local explanations.
Related Analysis
Practice All PMLE Questions
Access 65 questions with complete answers and detailed explanations.
View Full PMLE Practice Test →