IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,340,292
Granted Patent B1
US 12,340,292 · App. 18/807,491 · Granted Jun 24, 2025

Method and system for improving machine learning operation by reducing machine learning bias

Inventor: Baiwu Zhang (Toronto, CA)
Assignee: Bank of Montreal
G06N20/00
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,340,292
App. No.
18/807,491
Filed
Aug 16, 2024
Granted
Jun 24, 2025
Kind
B1
Art Unit
2121
USPC
706/12
Abstract

A network operation system and method accesses a training dataset for a network operation predictive model including historical network operation records and historical decision records, generates an inferred protected class dataset by executing a protected class demographic model, executes an algorithmic bias model using as input the historical decision records and the inferred protected class dataset to generate one or more fairness metrics, executes, based on the fairness metrics, a bias adjustment model using as input the historical decision records and the inferred protected class dataset to generate an adjusted training dataset, trains the network operation predictive model using as input the adjusted training dataset, receives an electronic request for a network operation, executes the network operation predictive model using as input at least one attribute of the electronic request for the network operation, and executes the network operation based on a prediction of the network operation predictive model.

Claims (54)

1. A method of improving efficiency of a machine learning model by reducing bias in the machine learning model via iterative training, the method comprising:

accessing, by a processor, a training dataset for a network operation predictive model comprising a plurality of historical network operation records and a plurality of historical decision records each representing a historical decision whether to accept a respective historical network operation;

generating, by the processor, an inferred protected class dataset by executing a protected class demographic model using as input the plurality of historical network operation records, wherein the inferred protected class dataset identifies predicted demographic groups for the plurality of historical network operation records;

executing, by the processor, an algorithmic bias model using as input the plurality of historical decision records and the inferred protected class dataset to generate one or more first fairness metrics for the plurality of historical decision records;

executing, by the processor, based on the one or more first fairness metrics, a bias adjustment model using as input the plurality of historical decision records and the inferred protected class dataset to generate an adjusted training dataset, wherein the adjusted training dataset includes only features correlated with target variables;

training, by the processor, the network operation predictive model by executing the network operation predictive model using as input the adjusted training dataset;

executing, by the processor, the network operation predictive model using as input a plurality of network operation records to generate a plurality of decision records;

executing, by the processor, the algorithmic bias model using as input the plurality of decision records to generate one or more second fairness metrics for the plurality of decision records generated by the network operation predictive model;

executing, by the processor, based on the one or more second fairness metrics, the bias adjustment model to adjust the network operation predictive model to increase the one or more second fairness metrics generated by the algorithmic bias model;

receiving, by the processor, an electronic request for a network operation;

executing, by the processor, the network operation predictive model using as input at least one attribute of the electronic request for the network operation; and

executing, by the processor, the network operation based on a prediction of the network operation predictive model.

2. The method of claim 1 , wherein generating the adjusted training dataset includes removing discriminatory features from the plurality of historical network operation records.

3. The method of claim 2 , wherein removing the discriminatory features from the training dataset includes screening features to include only features that correlate with target variables.

4. The method of claim 1 , further comprising training the protected class demographic model by comparing an output of the protected class demographic model to actual demographic information.

5. The method of claim 1 , further comprising removing, from the training dataset, overt identifiers of demographic information prior to generating the inferred protected class dataset.

6. The method of claim 1 , wherein the network operation predictive model is configured to output a decision whether to extend credit to a user.

7. The method of claim 1 , wherein the one or more fairness metrics include a fairness metric for a credit score for each of the historical network operation records.

8. The method of claim 1 , further comprising:

generating a second set of decision records by executing the network operation predictive model using as input a second set of network operation records;

generating a second inferred protected class dataset by executing the protected class demographic model using as input the second set of network operation records;

executing, by the processor, the algorithmic bias model on the second set of decision records and the second inferred protected class dataset to generate one or more second fairness metrics for the second set of decision records;

executing, by the processor, based on the one or more second fairness metrics, the bias adjustment model using as input the second set of decision records and the second inferred protected class dataset to generate a second adjusted training dataset; and

training the network operation predictive model using as input the second adjusted training dataset.

9. The method of claim 8 , wherein the second adjusted training dataset includes one or more decision records of the second set of decision records having a fairness metric below a predetermined threshold.

10. The method of claim 8 , wherein generating the second adjusted training dataset includes adjusting, based on the one or more second fairness metrics, one or more decision records of the second set of decision records.

11. A system, comprising:

a network operation predictive model;

a non-transitory machine-readable memory that stores a training dataset for the network operation predictive model comprised of a plurality of historical network operation records and a plurality of historical decision records each representing a decision whether to accept a respective historical network operation; and

a processor, wherein the processor in communication with the network operation predictive model and the non-transitory, machine-readable memory executes a set of instructions instructing the processor to:

generate an inferred protected class dataset by executing the protected class demographic model using as input the plurality of historical network operation records, wherein the inferred protected class dataset identifies predicted demographic groups for the plurality of historical network operation records;

execute an algorithmic bias model using as input the plurality of historical decision records and the inferred protected class dataset to generate one or more first fairness metrics for the plurality of historical decision records;

execute, based on the one or more first fairness metrics, a bias adjustment model using as input the plurality of historical decision records and the inferred protected class dataset to generate an adjusted training dataset, wherein the adjusted training dataset includes only features correlated with target variables;

train the network operation predictive model by executing the network operation predictive model using as input the adjusted training dataset;

execute the network operation predictive model using as input a plurality of network operation records to generate a plurality of decision records;

execute the algorithmic bias model using as input the plurality of decision records to generate one or more second fairness metrics for the plurality of decision records generated by the network operation predictive model;

execute, based on the one or more second fairness metrics, the bias adjustment model to adjust the network operation predictive model to increase the one or more second fairness metrics generated by the algorithmic bias model;

receive an electronic request for a network operation;

execute the network operation predictive model using as input at least one attribute of the electronic request for the network operation; and

execute the network operation based on a prediction of the network operation predictive model.

12. The system of claim 11 , wherein the instructions instruct the processor to generate the adjusted training dataset includes removing discriminatory features from the plurality of historical network operation records.

13. The system of claim 12 , wherein the instructions instruct the processor to remove the discriminatory features from the training dataset includes screening features to include only features that correlate with target variables.

14. The system of claim 11 , wherein the instructions instruct the processor to train the protected class demographic model by comparing an output of the protected class demographic model to actual demographic information.

15. The system of claim 11 , wherein the instructions instruct the processor to remove, from the training dataset, overt identifiers of demographic information prior to generating the inferred protected class dataset.

16. The system of claim 11 , wherein the network operation predictive model is configured to output a decision whether to extend credit to a user.

17. The system of claim 11 , wherein the one or more fairness metrics include a fairness metric for a credit score for each of the historical network operation records.

18. The system of claim 11 , wherein the instructions instruct the processor to:

generate a second set of decision records by executing the network operation predictive model using as input a second set of network operation records;

generate a second inferred protected class dataset by executing the protected class demographic model using as input the second set of network operation records;

execute the algorithmic bias model on the second set of decision records and the second inferred protected class dataset to generate one or more second fairness metrics for the second set of decision records;

execute based on the one or more second fairness metrics, the bias adjustment model using as input the second set of decision records and the second inferred protected class dataset to generate a second adjusted training dataset; and

train the network operation predictive model using as input the second adjusted training dataset.

19. The system of claim 18 , wherein the second adjusted training dataset includes one or more decision records of the second set of decision records having a fairness metric below a predetermined threshold.

20. The system of claim 18 , wherein the instructions instruct the processor to generate the second adjusted training dataset by adjusting, based on the one or more second fairness metrics, one or more decision records of the second set of decision records.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Aug 16, 2024
From: ZHANG, BAIWU
To: BANK OF MONTREAL
Reel/Frame 068318/0435 →
Continuity (1)
Continuation In Part 17492520 · Oct 1, 2021
References Cited (47)
US 9652745B2 · Taylor et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 10033474B1 · Gibson et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 11037230B2 · Ingerman et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11328092B2 · Barday et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 11494836B2 · Cella · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20060294158A1 · Tsyganskiy et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 20120215682A1 · Lent et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 20140070001A1 · Sanchez et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140222636A1 · Cheng et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20150106192A1 · Guo et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150142713A1 · Gopinathan et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150287138A1 · Granbery · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20160283740A1 · Roundtree · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20170154314A1 · Mones et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170293858A1 · Larsen et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170330058A1 · Silberman · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20180025389A1 · Arora et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20190043070A1 · Merrill et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190207960A1 · Chu et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20200126100A1 · Goyal et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200167653A1 · Manjunath et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200302309A1 · Golding · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200387836A1 · Nasr-Azadani et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20210357803A1 · Bhide et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20210383268A1 · Miroshnikov · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20210406712A1 · Bhide · 2021 [cited by examiner]
US 20220004923A1 · Kamkar et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20220076080A1 · Hacmon et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20220156634A1 · Margolin · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20220171991A1 · Das et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20220343288A1 · Vadrevu et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20220414766A1 · Miroshnikov · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20230008904A1 · Venkataraman et al. · 2023 [cited by applicant]
US 20240378508A1 · Mukhopadhyay · 2024 [cited by examiner]
Avoiding prejudice in data-based decisions by Shaw (6 pages) (Year: 2015). [cited by applicant]
Fairer machine learning in the real world: Mitigating discrimination without collecting sensitive data by Veale et al(22 pages) (Year: 2017). [cited by applicant]
Fairness-Aware Classification with Prejudice Remover Regularizer by Kamishima et al (16 pages) (Year: 2012). [cited by applicant]
Final Office Action on U.S. Appl. No. 17/492,520 dated May 8, 2023 (45 pages). [cited by applicant]
Final Office Action on U.S. Appl. No. 17/492,520 dated Mar. 20, 2024 (49 pages). [cited by applicant]
Non-Final Office Action on U.S. Appl. No. 17/492,520 dated Nov. 17, 2022 (27 pages). [cited by applicant]
Non-Final Office Action on U.S. Appl. No. 17/492,520 dated Nov. 7, 2023 (45 pages). [cited by applicant]
Over-Fitting and Regularization by Nagpal (4 pages) (Year: 2017). [cited by applicant]
Regularization in Machine Learning by Gupta (11 pages) (Year: 2017). [cited by applicant]
Regularization the pat to bias-variance Trade-off by Jimoh (27 pages) (Year: 2018). [cited by applicant]
Saleiro, et al., “Aequitas: A Bias and Fairness Audit Toolkit”, University of Chicago, 2018 (9 pages). [cited by applicant]
Towards Preventing Overfitting in Machine learning Regularization by Paul (10 pages) (Year: 2018). [cited by applicant]
Townson, Sian, “AI Can Make Bank Loans More Fair”, Harvard Business Review, Nov. 6, 2020 (6 pages). [cited by applicant]