Before revision: Fairness and explainability are two important and closely related requirements of decision making systems . While fairness and explainability of decision making systems have been extensively studied independently, only little effort has been put into studying fairness of explanations on their own. Current explanations can be unfair to an individual: an example is given by counterfactual explanations which propose different actions to change the output class to two similar individuals .
After revision: Fairness and explainability are two important and closely related requirements of decision making systems when these should be deployed in the real world. It is usually achieved by providing explanations of the system's behavior. A prominent and intuitive type of explanations are counterfactual explanations. Counterfactual explanations explain a behavior to the user by proposing actions -- as changes to the input -- that would cause a different (specified) behavior of the system. However, such explanation methods can be unstable with respect to small changes to the input -- i.e. even a small change in the input can lead to huge or arbitrary changes in the output and of the explanation. This could be problematic for counterfactual explanations, as two similar individuals .