impfpr
The false positive rate the other rates imply
impfpr(p, ppv, fnr)Chouldechova’s (2017) identity: in any confusion table, the false
positive rate is p / (1 - p) (1 - ppv) / ppv (1 - fnr), from the base
rate p, the positive predictive value ppv and the false negative
rate fnr. So two groups whose scores are equally calibrated (the same
ppv) and miss equally (the same fnr) but whose base rates differ
must have different false positive rates: no score, however it is
built, can equalise all three. The identity is arithmetic, true of any
tool on any data; it says which equalities cannot hold together, not
which one should give way. See proof("impfpr").
Parameters
Section titled “Parameters”pBase rates, strictly between 0 and 1.
ppvPositive predictive values, above 0 and at most 1.
fnrFalse negative rates, from 0 and below 1. The three have one length (or length 1); named ones are matched by name.
Returns
Section titled “Returns”The false positive rates, one per triple.
References
Section titled “References”Chouldechova, A. (2017). Fair prediction with disparate impact: a study of bias in recidivism prediction instruments. Big Data, 5(2), 153-163. doi:10.1089/big.2016.0047
Examples
Section titled “Examples”# the same ppv and fnr, different base rates: different fprimpfpr(p = c(a = 0.3, b = 0.5), ppv = 0.6, fnr = 0.25)Also in the R reference, with the method and its source.