Mitigating Dataset Bias by Using Per-sample Gradient

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2205.15704v1
• Date: Tue, 31 May 2022 11:41:02 GMT
• Title: Mitigating Dataset Bias by Using Per-sample Gradient
• Authors: Sumyeong Ahn, Seongyoon Kim, and Se-young Yun
• Abstract summary: We propose PGD (Per-sample Gradient-based Debiasing), that comprises three steps: training a model on uniform batch sampling, setting the importance of each sample in proportion to the norm of the sample gradient, and training the model using importance-batch sampling. Compared with existing baselines for various synthetic and real-world datasets, the proposed method showed state-of-the-art accuracy for a the classification task.
• Score: 9.290757451344673
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The performance of deep neural networks is strongly influenced by the training dataset setup. In particular, when attributes having a strong correlation with the target attribute are present, the trained model can provide unintended prejudgments and show significant inference errors (i.e., the dataset bias problem). Various methods have been proposed to mitigate dataset bias, and their emphasis is on weakly correlated samples, called bias-conflicting samples. These methods are based on explicit bias labels involving human or empirical correlation metrics (e.g., training loss). However, such metrics require human costs or have insufficient theoretical explanation. In this study, we propose a debiasing algorithm, called PGD (Per-sample Gradient-based Debiasing), that comprises three steps: (1) training a model on uniform batch sampling, (2) setting the importance of each sample in proportion to the norm of the sample gradient, and (3) training the model using importance-batch sampling, whose probability is obtained in step (2). Compared with existing baselines for various synthetic and real-world datasets, the proposed method showed state-of-the-art accuracy for a the classification task. Furthermore, we describe theoretical understandings about how PGD can mitigate dataset bias.

Related papers

• Downstream-Pretext Domain Knowledge Traceback for Active Learning [138.02530777915362]
  We propose a downstream-pretext domain knowledge traceback (DOKT) method that traces the data interactions of downstream knowledge and pre-training guidance. DOKT consists of a traceback diversity indicator and a domain-based uncertainty estimator. Experiments conducted on ten datasets show that our model outperforms other state-of-the-art methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-20T01:34:13Z)
• Revisiting the Dataset Bias Problem from a Statistical Perspective [72.94990819287551]
  We study the "dataset bias" problem from a statistical standpoint. We identify the main cause of the problem as the strong correlation between a class attribute u and a non-class attribute b. We propose to mitigate dataset bias via either weighting the objective of each sample n by frac1p(u_n|b_n) or sampling that sample with a weight proportional to frac1p(u_n|b_n).
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-05T22:58:06Z)
• Delving into Identify-Emphasize Paradigm for Combating Unknown Bias [52.76758938921129]
  We propose an effective bias-conflicting scoring method (ECS) to boost the identification accuracy. We also propose gradient alignment (GA) to balance the contributions of the mined bias-aligned and bias-conflicting samples. Experiments are conducted on multiple datasets in various settings, demonstrating that the proposed solution can mitigate the impact of unknown biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-22T14:50:24Z)
• Certifying Data-Bias Robustness in Linear Regression [12.00314910031517]
  We present a technique for certifying whether linear regression models are pointwise-robust to label bias in a training dataset. We show how to solve this problem exactly for individual test points, and provide an approximate but more scalable method. We also unearth gaps in bias-robustness, such as high levels of non-robustness for certain bias assumptions on some datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-07T20:47:07Z)
• Bias-inducing geometries: an exactly solvable data model with fairness implications [13.690313475721094]
  We introduce an exactly solvable high-dimensional model of data imbalance. We analytically unpack the typical properties of learning models trained in this synthetic framework. We obtain exact predictions for the observables that are commonly employed for fairness assessment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-31T16:27:57Z)
• CMW-Net: Learning a Class-Aware Sample Weighting Mapping for Robust Deep Learning [55.733193075728096]
  Modern deep neural networks can easily overfit to biased training data containing corrupted labels or class imbalance. Sample re-weighting methods are popularly used to alleviate this data bias issue. We propose a meta-model capable of adaptively learning an explicit weighting scheme directly from data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-11T13:49:51Z)
• FairIF: Boosting Fairness in Deep Learning via Influence Functions with Validation Set Sensitive Attributes [51.02407217197623]
  We propose a two-stage training algorithm named FAIRIF. It minimizes the loss over the reweighted data set where the sample weights are computed. We show that FAIRIF yields models with better fairness-utility trade-offs against various types of bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-15T05:14:48Z)
• Bayesian analysis of the prevalence bias: learning and predicting from imbalanced data [10.659348599372944]
  This paper lays the theoretical and computational framework for training models, and for prediction, in the presence of prevalence bias. It offers an alternative to principled training losses and complements test-time procedures based on selecting an operating point from summary curves. It integrates seamlessly in the current paradigm of (deep) learning using backpropagation and naturally with Bayesian models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-31T14:36:33Z)
• Learning Debiased Representation via Disentangled Feature Augmentation [19.348340314001756]
  This paper presents an empirical analysis revealing that training with "diverse" bias-conflicting samples is crucial for debiasing. We propose a novel feature-level data augmentation technique in order to synthesize diverse bias-conflicting samples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-07-03T08:03:25Z)
• Why resampling outperforms reweighting for correcting sampling bias with stochastic gradients [10.860844636412862]
  Training machine learning models on biased data sets requires correction techniques to compensate for the bias. We consider two commonly-used techniques, resampling and reweighting, that rebalance the proportions of the subgroups to maintain the desired objective function.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-28T16:12:38Z)
• An Investigation of Why Overparameterization Exacerbates Spurious Correlations [98.3066727301239]
  We identify two key properties of the training data that drive this behavior. We show how the inductive bias of models towards "memorizing" fewer examples can cause over parameterization to hurt.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-09T01:59:13Z)

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.