Visual Identification of Problematic Bias in Large Label Spaces

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2201.06386v1
• Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2022 12:51:08 GMT
• Title: Visual Identification of Problematic Bias in Large Label Spaces
• Authors: Alex B\"auerle, Aybuke Gul Turker, Ken Burke, Osman Aka, Timo Ropinski, Christina Greer, and Mani Varadarajan
• Abstract summary: Key challenge in scaling common fairness metrics to modern models and datasets is the requirement of exhaustive ground truth labeling. domain experts need to be able to extract and reason about bias throughout models and datasets to make informed decisions. We propose guidelines for designing visualizations for such large label spaces, considering both technical and ethical issues.
• Score: 5.841861400363261
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: While the need for well-trained, fair ML systems is increasing ever more, measuring fairness for modern models and datasets is becoming increasingly difficult as they grow at an unprecedented pace. One key challenge in scaling common fairness metrics to such models and datasets is the requirement of exhaustive ground truth labeling, which cannot always be done. Indeed, this often rules out the application of traditional analysis metrics and systems. At the same time, ML-fairness assessments cannot be made algorithmically, as fairness is a highly subjective matter. Thus, domain experts need to be able to extract and reason about bias throughout models and datasets to make informed decisions. While visual analysis tools are of great help when investigating potential bias in DL models, none of the existing approaches have been designed for the specific tasks and challenges that arise in large label spaces. Addressing the lack of visualization work in this area, we propose guidelines for designing visualizations for such large label spaces, considering both technical and ethical issues. Our proposed visualization approach can be integrated into classical model and data pipelines, and we provide an implementation of our techniques open-sourced as a TensorBoard plug-in. With our approach, different models and datasets for large label spaces can be systematically and visually analyzed and compared to make informed fairness assessments tackling problematic bias.

Related papers

• Thinking Racial Bias in Fair Forgery Detection: Models, Datasets and Evaluations [63.52709761339949]
  We first contribute a dedicated dataset called the Fair Forgery Detection (FairFD) dataset, where we prove the racial bias of public state-of-the-art (SOTA) methods. We design novel metrics including Approach Averaged Metric and Utility Regularized Metric, which can avoid deceptive results. We also present an effective and robust post-processing technique, Bias Pruning with Fair Activations (BPFA), which improves fairness without requiring retraining or weight updates.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-19T14:53:18Z)
• Data-efficient Large Vision Models through Sequential Autoregression [58.26179273091461]
  We develop an efficient, autoregression-based vision model on a limited dataset. We demonstrate how this model achieves proficiency in a spectrum of visual tasks spanning both high-level and low-level semantic understanding. Our empirical evaluations underscore the model's agility in adapting to various tasks, heralding a significant reduction in the parameter footprint.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-07T13:41:53Z)
• 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)
• Fairness meets Cross-Domain Learning: a new perspective on Models and Metrics [80.07271410743806]
  We study the relationship between cross-domain learning (CD) and model fairness. We introduce a benchmark on face and medical images spanning several demographic groups as well as classification and localization tasks. Our study covers 14 CD approaches alongside three state-of-the-art fairness algorithms and shows how the former can outperform the latter.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-25T09:34:05Z)
• Debiasing Vision-Language Models via Biased Prompts [79.04467131711775]
  We propose a general approach for debiasing vision-language foundation models by projecting out biased directions in the text embedding. We show that debiasing only the text embedding with a calibrated projection matrix suffices to yield robust classifiers and fair generative models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-31T20:09:33Z)
• 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)
• Assessing Demographic Bias Transfer from Dataset to Model: A Case Study in Facial Expression Recognition [1.5340540198612824]
  Two metrics focus on the representational and stereotypical bias of the dataset, and the third one on the residual bias of the trained model. We demonstrate the usefulness of the metrics by applying them to a FER problem based on the popular Affectnet dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-20T09:40:42Z)
• Semi-supervised Deep Learning for Image Classification with Distribution Mismatch: A Survey [1.5469452301122175]
  Deep learning models rely on the abundance of labelled observations to train a prospective model. It is expensive to gather labelled observations of data, making the usage of deep learning models not ideal. In many situations different unlabelled data sources might be available. This raises the risk of a significant distribution mismatch between the labelled and unlabelled datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-01T02:46:00Z)
• LiFT: A Scalable Framework for Measuring Fairness in ML Applications [18.54302159142362]
  We present the LinkedIn Fairness Toolkit (LiFT), a framework for scalable computation of fairness metrics as part of large ML systems. We discuss the challenges encountered in incorporating fairness tools in practice and the lessons learned during deployment at LinkedIn.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-14T03:55:31Z)
• Learning from Imperfect Annotations [15.306536555936692]
  Many machine learning systems today are trained on large amounts of human-annotated data. We propose a new end-to-end framework that enables us to merge the aggregation step with model training. We show accuracy gains of up to 25% over the current state-of-the-art approaches for aggregating annotations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-07T15:21:08Z)

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.