Fairness Through Robustness: Investigating Robustness Disparity in Deep Learning

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2006.12621v4
• Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2021 13:18:04 GMT
• Title: Fairness Through Robustness: Investigating Robustness Disparity in Deep Learning
• Authors: Vedant Nanda and Samuel Dooley and Sahil Singla and Soheil Feizi and John P. Dickerson
• Abstract summary: We argue that traditional notions of fairness are not sufficient when the model is vulnerable to adversarial attacks. We show that measuring robustness bias is a challenging task for DNNs and propose two methods to measure this form of bias.
• Score: 61.93730166203915
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Deep neural networks (DNNs) are increasingly used in real-world applications (e.g. facial recognition). This has resulted in concerns about the fairness of decisions made by these models. Various notions and measures of fairness have been proposed to ensure that a decision-making system does not disproportionately harm (or benefit) particular subgroups of the population. In this paper, we argue that traditional notions of fairness that are only based on models' outputs are not sufficient when the model is vulnerable to adversarial attacks. We argue that in some cases, it may be easier for an attacker to target a particular subgroup, resulting in a form of \textit{robustness bias}. We show that measuring robustness bias is a challenging task for DNNs and propose two methods to measure this form of bias. We then conduct an empirical study on state-of-the-art neural networks on commonly used real-world datasets such as CIFAR-10, CIFAR-100, Adience, and UTKFace and show that in almost all cases there are subgroups (in some cases based on sensitive attributes like race, gender, etc) which are less robust and are thus at a disadvantage. We argue that this kind of bias arises due to both the data distribution and the highly complex nature of the learned decision boundary in the case of DNNs, thus making mitigation of such biases a non-trivial task. Our results show that robustness bias is an important criterion to consider while auditing real-world systems that rely on DNNs for decision making. Code to reproduce all our results can be found here: \url{https://github.com/nvedant07/Fairness-Through-Robustness}

Related papers

• Fast Model Debias with Machine Unlearning [54.32026474971696]
  Deep neural networks might behave in a biased manner in many real-world scenarios. Existing debiasing methods suffer from high costs in bias labeling or model re-training. We propose a fast model debiasing framework (FMD) which offers an efficient approach to identify, evaluate and remove biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-19T08:10:57Z)
• FAIRER: Fairness as Decision Rationale Alignment [23.098752318439782]
  Deep neural networks (DNNs) have made significant progress, but often suffer from fairness issues. It is unclear how the trained network makes a fair prediction, which limits future fairness improvements. We propose gradient-guided parity alignment, which encourages gradient-weighted consistency of neurons across subgroups.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-27T08:37:57Z)
• Mitigating Gender Bias in Face Recognition Using the von Mises-Fisher Mixture Model [7.049738935364298]
  In this work, we investigate the gender bias of deep Face Recognition networks. Motivated by geometric considerations, we mitigate gender bias through a new post-processing methodology. In fact, extensive numerical experiments on a variety of datasets show that a careful selection significantly reduces gender bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-24T23:53:56Z)
• Rethinking Bias Mitigation: Fairer Architectures Make for Fairer Face Recognition [107.58227666024791]
  Face recognition systems are widely deployed in safety-critical applications, including law enforcement. They exhibit bias across a range of socio-demographic dimensions, such as gender and race. Previous works on bias mitigation largely focused on pre-processing the training data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-18T15:46:05Z)
• D-BIAS: A Causality-Based Human-in-the-Loop System for Tackling Algorithmic Bias [57.87117733071416]
  We propose D-BIAS, a visual interactive tool that embodies human-in-the-loop AI approach for auditing and mitigating social biases. A user can detect the presence of bias against a group by identifying unfair causal relationships in the causal network. For each interaction, say weakening/deleting a biased causal edge, the system uses a novel method to simulate a new (debiased) dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-08-10T03:41:48Z)
• Unsupervised Learning of Unbiased Visual Representations [10.871587311621974]
  Deep neural networks are known for their inability to learn robust representations when biases exist in the dataset. We propose a fully unsupervised debiasing framework, consisting of three steps. We employ state-of-the-art supervised debiasing techniques to obtain an unbiased model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-26T10:51:50Z)
• EDITS: Modeling and Mitigating Data Bias for Graph Neural Networks [29.974829042502375]
  We develop a framework named EDITS to mitigate the bias in attributed networks. EDITS works in a model-agnostic manner, which means that it is independent of the specific GNNs applied for downstream tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-08-11T14:07:01Z)
• Towards Measuring Bias in Image Classification [61.802949761385]
  Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN) have become state-of-the-art for the main computer vision tasks. However, due to the complex structure their decisions are hard to understand which limits their use in some context of the industrial world. We present a systematic approach to uncover data bias by means of attribution maps.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-01T10:50:39Z)
• Simon Says: Evaluating and Mitigating Bias in Pruned Neural Networks with Knowledge Distillation [8.238238958749134]
  A clear gap exists in the current literature on evaluating and mitigating bias in pruned neural networks. We propose two simple yet effective metrics, Combined Error Variance (CEV) and Symmetric Distance Error (SDE) to quantitatively evaluate the induced bias prevention quality. Second, we demonstrate that knowledge distillation can mitigate induced bias in pruned neural networks, even with unbalanced datasets. Third, we reveal that model similarity has strong correlations with pruning induced bias, which provides a powerful method to explain why bias occurs in pruned neural networks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-15T02:59:32Z)
• How benign is benign overfitting? [96.07549886487526]
  We investigate two causes for adversarial vulnerability in deep neural networks: bad data and (poorly) trained models. Deep neural networks essentially achieve zero training error, even in the presence of label noise. We identify label noise as one of the causes for adversarial vulnerability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-08T11:07:10Z)

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.