Underestimation Bias and Underfitting in Machine Learning

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2005.09052v3
• Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2021 09:41:48 GMT
• Title: Underestimation Bias and Underfitting in Machine Learning
• Authors: Padraig Cunningham, Sarah Jane Delany
• Abstract summary: What is termed algorithmic bias in machine learning will be due to historic bias in the training data. Sometimes the bias may be introduced (or at least exacerbated) by the algorithm itself. In this paper we report on initial research to understand the factors that contribute to bias in classification algorithms.
• Score: 2.639737913330821
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Often, what is termed algorithmic bias in machine learning will be due to historic bias in the training data. But sometimes the bias may be introduced (or at least exacerbated) by the algorithm itself. The ways in which algorithms can actually accentuate bias has not received a lot of attention with researchers focusing directly on methods to eliminate bias - no matter the source. In this paper we report on initial research to understand the factors that contribute to bias in classification algorithms. We believe this is important because underestimation bias is inextricably tied to regularization, i.e. measures to address overfitting can accentuate bias.

Related papers

• Mitigating Algorithmic Bias on Facial Expression Recognition [0.0]
  Biased datasets are ubiquitous and present a challenge for machine learning. The problem of biased datasets is especially sensitive when dealing with minority people groups. This work explores one way to mitigate bias using a debiasing variational autoencoder with experiments on facial expression recognition.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-23T17:41:30Z)
• A survey on bias in machine learning research [0.0]
  Current research on bias in machine learning often focuses on fairness, while overlooking the roots or causes of bias. This article aims to bridge the gap between past literature on bias in research by providing taxonomy for potential sources of bias and errors in data and models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-22T07:56:57Z)
• Signal Is Harder To Learn Than Bias: Debiasing with Focal Loss [10.031357641396616]
  neural networks are notorious for learning unwanted associations, also known as biases, instead of the underlying decision rule. We propose Signal is Harder, a variational-autoencoder-based method that simultaneously trains a biased and unbiased classifier. We propose a perturbation scheme in the latent space for visualizing the bias that helps practitioners become aware of the sources of spurious correlations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-31T09:09:59Z)
• Whole Page Unbiased Learning to Rank [59.52040055543542]
  Unbiased Learning to Rank(ULTR) algorithms are proposed to learn an unbiased ranking model with biased click data. We propose a Bias Agnostic whole-page unbiased Learning to rank algorithm, named BAL, to automatically find the user behavior model. Experimental results on a real-world dataset verify the effectiveness of the BAL.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-19T16:53:08Z)
• The SAME score: Improved cosine based bias score for word embeddings [49.75878234192369]
  We introduce SAME, a novel bias score for semantic bias in embeddings. We show that SAME is capable of measuring semantic bias and identify potential causes for social bias in downstream tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-28T09:28:13Z)
• Pseudo Bias-Balanced Learning for Debiased Chest X-ray Classification [57.53567756716656]
  We study the problem of developing debiased chest X-ray diagnosis models without knowing exactly the bias labels. We propose a novel algorithm, pseudo bias-balanced learning, which first captures and predicts per-sample bias labels. Our proposed method achieved consistent improvements over other state-of-the-art approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-18T11:02:18Z)
• Information-Theoretic Bias Reduction via Causal View of Spurious Correlation [71.9123886505321]
  We propose an information-theoretic bias measurement technique through a causal interpretation of spurious correlation. We present a novel debiasing framework against the algorithmic bias, which incorporates a bias regularization loss. The proposed bias measurement and debiasing approaches are validated in diverse realistic scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-10T01:19:31Z)
• Algorithms are not neutral: Bias in collaborative filtering [0.0]
  Discussions of algorithmic bias tend to focus on examples where either the data or the people building the algorithms are biased. This is illustrated with the example of collaborative filtering, which is known to suffer from popularity, and homogenizing biases. Popularity and homogenizing biases have the effect of further marginalizing the already marginal.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-03T17:28:43Z)
• Towards causal benchmarking of bias in face analysis algorithms [54.19499274513654]
  We develop an experimental method for measuring algorithmic bias of face analysis algorithms. Our proposed method is based on generating synthetic transects'' of matched sample images. We validate our method by comparing it to a study that employs the traditional observational method for analyzing bias in gender classification algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-13T17:10:34Z)
• Mitigating Gender Bias Amplification in Distribution by Posterior Regularization [75.3529537096899]
  We investigate the gender bias amplification issue from the distribution perspective. We propose a bias mitigation approach based on posterior regularization. Our study sheds the light on understanding the bias amplification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-13T11:07:10Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.