Analyzing Fairness of Computer Vision and Natural Language Processing Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2412.09900v3
• Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2025 21:24:40 GMT
• Title: Analyzing Fairness of Computer Vision and Natural Language Processing Models
• Authors: Ahmed Rashed, Abdelkrim Kallich, Mohamed Eltayeb,
• Abstract summary: This research utilizes two fairness libraries, Fairlearn by Microsoft and AIF360 by IBM.<n>The study focuses on assessing and mitigating biases for unstructured datasets using Computer Vision (CV) and Natural Language Processing (NLP) models.<n>Results reveal that some sequential applications improve the performance of mitigation algorithms by effectively reducing bias while maintaining the model's performance.
• Score: 1.0923877073891446
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Machine learning (ML) algorithms play a critical role in decision-making across various domains, such as healthcare, finance, education, and law enforcement. However, concerns about fairness and bias in these systems have raised significant ethical and social challenges. To address these challenges, this research utilizes two prominent fairness libraries, Fairlearn by Microsoft and AIF360 by IBM. These libraries offer comprehensive frameworks for fairness analysis, providing tools to evaluate fairness metrics, visualize results, and implement bias mitigation algorithms. The study focuses on assessing and mitigating biases for unstructured datasets using Computer Vision (CV) and Natural Language Processing (NLP) models. The primary objective is to present a comparative analysis of the performance of mitigation algorithms from the two fairness libraries. This analysis involves applying the algorithms individually, one at a time, in one of the stages of the ML lifecycle, pre-processing, in-processing, or post-processing, as well as sequentially across more than one stage. The results reveal that some sequential applications improve the performance of mitigation algorithms by effectively reducing bias while maintaining the model's performance. Publicly available datasets from Kaggle were chosen for this research, providing a practical context for evaluating fairness in real-world machine learning workflows.

Related papers

• Systematic Evaluation of Optimization Techniques for Long-Context Language Models [15.377591633726396]
  Large language models (LLMs) excel across diverse natural language processing tasks but face resource demands and limited context windows.<n>This paper systematically benchmarks these optimizations, characterizing memory usage, latency, and throughput, and studies how these methods impact the quality of text generation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-01T04:17:24Z)
• Contextual Fairness-Aware Practices in ML: A Cost-Effective Empirical Evaluation [48.943054662940916]
  We investigate fairness-aware practices from two perspectives: contextual and cost-effectiveness. Our findings provide insights into how context influences the effectiveness of fairness-aware practices. This research aims to guide SE practitioners in selecting practices that achieve fairness with minimal performance costs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-19T18:10:21Z)
• Analyzing Fairness of Classification Machine Learning Model with Structured Dataset [1.0923877073891446]
  This study investigates the fairness of machine learning models applied to structured datasets in classification tasks.<n>Three fairness libraries; Fairlearn by Microsoft, AIF360 by IBM, and the What If Tool by Google were employed.<n>The research aims to assess the extent of bias in the ML models, compare the effectiveness of these libraries, and derive actionable insights for practitioners.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-13T06:31:09Z)
• Optimisation Strategies for Ensuring Fairness in Machine Learning: With and Without Demographics [4.662958544712181]
  This paper introduces two formal frameworks to tackle open questions in machine learning fairness. In one framework, operator-valued optimisation and min-max objectives are employed to address unfairness in time-series problems. In the second framework, the challenge of lacking sensitive attributes, such as gender and race, in commonly used datasets is addressed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-13T22:29:23Z)
• FAIREDU: A Multiple Regression-Based Method for Enhancing Fairness in Machine Learning Models for Educational Applications [1.24497353837144]
  This paper introduces FAIREDU, a novel and effective method designed to improve fairness across multiple sensitive features. Through extensive experiments, we evaluate FAIREDU effectiveness in enhancing fairness without compromising model performance. The results demonstrate that FAIREDU addresses intersectionality across features such as gender, race, age, and other sensitive features, outperforming state-of-the-art methods with minimal effect on model accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-08T23:29:24Z)
• A Benchmark for Fairness-Aware Graph Learning [58.515305543487386]
  We present an extensive benchmark on ten representative fairness-aware graph learning methods. Our in-depth analysis reveals key insights into the strengths and limitations of existing methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-16T18:43:43Z)
• Measuring, Interpreting, and Improving Fairness of Algorithms using Causal Inference and Randomized Experiments [8.62694928567939]
  We present an algorithm-agnostic framework (MIIF) to Measure, Interpret, and Improve the Fairness of an algorithmic decision. We measure the algorithm bias using randomized experiments, which enables the simultaneous measurement of disparate treatment, disparate impact, and economic value. We also develop an explainable machine learning model which accurately interprets and distills the beliefs of a blackbox algorithm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-04T19:45:18Z)
• Bias and Fairness in Large Language Models: A Survey [73.87651986156006]
  We present a comprehensive survey of bias evaluation and mitigation techniques for large language models (LLMs) We first consolidate, formalize, and expand notions of social bias and fairness in natural language processing. We then unify the literature by proposing three intuitive, two for bias evaluation, and one for mitigation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-02T00:32:55Z)
• Fair Few-shot Learning with Auxiliary Sets [53.30014767684218]
  In many machine learning (ML) tasks, only very few labeled data samples can be collected, which can lead to inferior fairness performance. In this paper, we define the fairness-aware learning task with limited training samples as the emphfair few-shot learning problem. We devise a novel framework that accumulates fairness-aware knowledge across different meta-training tasks and then generalizes the learned knowledge to meta-test tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-28T06:31:37Z)
• Towards Fair and Explainable AI using a Human-Centered AI Approach [5.888646114353372]
  We present 5 research projects that aim to enhance explainability and fairness in classification systems and word embeddings. The first project explores the utility/downsides of introducing local model explanations as interfaces for machine teachers. The second project presents D-BIAS, a causality-based human-in-the-loop visual tool for identifying and mitigating social biases in datasets. The third project presents WordBias, a visual interactive tool that helps audit pre-trained static word embeddings for biases against groups. The fourth project presents DramatVis Personae, a visual analytics tool that helps identify social
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-12T21:08:55Z)
• 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)
• Individual Fairness under Uncertainty [26.183244654397477]
  Algorithmic fairness is an established area in machine learning (ML) algorithms. We propose an individual fairness measure and a corresponding algorithm that deal with the challenges of uncertainty arising from censorship in class labels. We argue that this perspective represents a more realistic model of fairness research for real-world application deployment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-16T01:07:58Z)
• Investigating Fairness Disparities in Peer Review: A Language Model Enhanced Approach [77.61131357420201]
  We conduct a thorough and rigorous study on fairness disparities in peer review with the help of large language models (LMs) We collect, assemble, and maintain a comprehensive relational database for the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR) conference from 2017 to date. We postulate and study fairness disparities on multiple protective attributes of interest, including author gender, geography, author, and institutional prestige.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-07T16:19:42Z)
• A survey on datasets for fairness-aware machine learning [6.962333053044713]
  A large variety of fairness-aware machine learning solutions have been proposed. In this paper, we overview real-world datasets used for fairness-aware machine learning. For a deeper understanding of bias and fairness in the datasets, we investigate the interesting relationships using exploratory analysis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-01T16:54:04Z)
• Fair Representation Learning for Heterogeneous Information Networks [35.80367469624887]
  We propose a comprehensive set of de-biasing methods for fair HINs representation learning. We study the behavior of these algorithms, especially their capability in balancing the trade-off between fairness and prediction accuracy. We evaluate the performance of the proposed methods in an automated career counseling application.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-18T08:28:18Z)
• Can Active Learning Preemptively Mitigate Fairness Issues? [66.84854430781097]
  dataset bias is one of the prevailing causes of unfairness in machine learning. We study whether models trained with uncertainty-based ALs are fairer in their decisions with respect to a protected class. We also explore the interaction of algorithmic fairness methods such as gradient reversal (GRAD) and BALD.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-14T14:20:22Z)
• Causal Feature Selection for Algorithmic Fairness [61.767399505764736]
  We consider fairness in the integration component of data management. We propose an approach to identify a sub-collection of features that ensure the fairness of the dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-10T20:20:10Z)

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.