Perceptual Fairness in Image Restoration
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2405.13805v2
- Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2024 12:43:47 GMT
- Title: Perceptual Fairness in Image Restoration
- Authors: Guy Ohayon, Michael Elad, Tomer Michaeli,
- Abstract summary: Group Perceptual Index (GPI) is a statistical distance between the distribution of the group's ground truth images and the distribution of their reconstructions.
We assess the fairness of an algorithm by comparing the GPI of different groups, and say that it achieves perfect Perceptual Fairness (PF) if the GPIs of all groups are identical.
- Score: 34.50287066865267
- License:
- Abstract: Fairness in image restoration tasks is the desire to treat different sub-groups of images equally well. Existing definitions of fairness in image restoration are highly restrictive. They consider a reconstruction to be a correct outcome for a group (e.g., women) only if it falls within the group's set of ground truth images (e.g., natural images of women); otherwise, it is considered entirely incorrect. Consequently, such definitions are prone to controversy, as errors in image restoration can manifest in various ways. In this work we offer an alternative approach towards fairness in image restoration, by considering the Group Perceptual Index (GPI), which we define as the statistical distance between the distribution of the group's ground truth images and the distribution of their reconstructions. We assess the fairness of an algorithm by comparing the GPI of different groups, and say that it achieves perfect Perceptual Fairness (PF) if the GPIs of all groups are identical. We motivate and theoretically study our new notion of fairness, draw its connection to previous ones, and demonstrate its utility on state-of-the-art face image restoration algorithms.
Related papers
- Implementing Fairness: the view from a FairDream [0.0]
We train an AI model and develop our own fairness package FairDream to detect inequalities and then to correct for them.
Our experiments show that it is a property of FairDream to fulfill fairness objectives which are conditional on the ground truth.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-20T06:06:24Z) - Learning to Rank Patches for Unbiased Image Redundancy Reduction [80.93989115541966]
Images suffer from heavy spatial redundancy because pixels in neighboring regions are spatially correlated.
Existing approaches strive to overcome this limitation by reducing less meaningful image regions.
We propose a self-supervised framework for image redundancy reduction called Learning to Rank Patches.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-03-31T13:12:41Z) - Classes Are Not Equal: An Empirical Study on Image Recognition Fairness [100.36114135663836]
We experimentally demonstrate that classes are not equal and the fairness issue is prevalent for image classification models across various datasets.
Our findings reveal that models tend to exhibit greater prediction biases for classes that are more challenging to recognize.
Data augmentation and representation learning algorithms improve overall performance by promoting fairness to some degree in image classification.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-28T07:54:50Z) - Interpretable Measures of Conceptual Similarity by
Complexity-Constrained Descriptive Auto-Encoding [112.0878081944858]
Quantifying the degree of similarity between images is a key copyright issue for image-based machine learning.
We seek to define and compute a notion of "conceptual similarity" among images that captures high-level relations.
Two highly dissimilar images can be discriminated early in their description, whereas conceptually dissimilar ones will need more detail to be distinguished.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-14T03:31:17Z) - Fair Without Leveling Down: A New Intersectional Fairness Definition [1.0958014189747356]
We propose a new definition called the $alpha$-Intersectional Fairness, which combines the absolute and the relative performance across sensitive groups.
We benchmark multiple popular in-processing fair machine learning approaches using our new fairness definition and show that they do not achieve any improvement over a simple baseline.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-05-21T16:15:12Z) - Fair Group-Shared Representations with Normalizing Flows [68.29997072804537]
We develop a fair representation learning algorithm which is able to map individuals belonging to different groups in a single group.
We show experimentally that our methodology is competitive with other fair representation learning algorithms.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-01-17T10:49:49Z) - Fair Representation: Guaranteeing Approximate Multiple Group Fairness
for Unknown Tasks [17.231251035416648]
We study whether fair representation can be used to guarantee fairness for unknown tasks and for multiple fairness notions simultaneously.
We prove that, although fair representation might not guarantee fairness for all prediction tasks, it does guarantee fairness for an important subset of tasks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-09-01T17:29:11Z) - Fairness for Image Generation with Uncertain Sensitive Attributes [97.81354305427871]
This work tackles the issue of fairness in the context of generative procedures, such as image super-resolution.
While traditional group fairness definitions are typically defined with respect to specified protected groups, we emphasize that there are no ground truth identities.
We show that the natural extension of demographic parity is strongly dependent on the grouping, and emphimpossible to achieve obliviously.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-06-23T06:17:17Z) - Metric-Free Individual Fairness with Cooperative Contextual Bandits [17.985752744098267]
Group fairness requires that different groups should be treated similarly which might be unfair to some individuals within a group.
Individual fairness remains understudied due to its reliance on problem-specific similarity metrics.
We propose a metric-free individual fairness and a cooperative contextual bandits algorithm.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-11-13T03:10:35Z)
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.