INFELM: In-depth Fairness Evaluation of Large Text-To-Image Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2501.01973v3
• Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2025 07:26:05 GMT
• Title: INFELM: In-depth Fairness Evaluation of Large Text-To-Image Models
• Authors: Di Jin, Xing Liu, Yu Liu, Jia Qing Yap, Andrea Wong, Adriana Crespo, Qi Lin, Zhiyuan Yin, Qiang Yan, Ryan Ye,
• Abstract summary: Multi-modal AI systems have potential for industrial applications by emulating human-like cognition.<n>They also pose significant ethical challenges, including amplifying harmful content and reinforcing societal biases.<n>This paper presents INFELM, an in-depth fairness evaluation on widely-used text-to-image models.
• Score: 8.340794604348632
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The rapid development of large language models (LLMs) and large vision models (LVMs) have propelled the evolution of multi-modal AI systems, which have demonstrated the remarkable potential for industrial applications by emulating human-like cognition. However, they also pose significant ethical challenges, including amplifying harmful content and reinforcing societal biases. For instance, biases in some industrial image generation models highlighted the urgent need for robust fairness assessments. Most existing evaluation frameworks focus on the comprehensiveness of various aspects of the models, but they exhibit critical limitations, including insufficient attention to content generation alignment and social bias-sensitive domains. More importantly, their reliance on pixel-detection techniques is prone to inaccuracies. To address these issues, this paper presents INFELM, an in-depth fairness evaluation on widely-used text-to-image models. Our key contributions are: (1) an advanced skintone classifier incorporating facial topology and refined skin pixel representation to enhance classification precision by at least 16.04%, (2) a bias-sensitive content alignment measurement for understanding societal impacts, (3) a generalizable representation bias evaluation for diverse demographic groups, and (4) extensive experiments analyzing large-scale text-to-image model outputs across six social-bias-sensitive domains. We find that existing models in the study generally do not meet the empirical fairness criteria, and representation bias is generally more pronounced than alignment errors. INFELM establishes a robust benchmark for fairness assessment, supporting the development of multi-modal AI systems that align with ethical and human-centric principles.

Related papers

• Envisioning Beyond the Pixels: Benchmarking Reasoning-Informed Visual Editing [90.65399476233495]
  We introduce RISEBench, the first benchmark for evaluating Reasoning-Informed viSual Editing (RISE) RISEBench focuses on four key reasoning types: Temporal, Causal, Spatial, and Logical Reasoning. We propose an evaluation framework that assesses Instruction Reasoning, Appearance Consistency, and Visual Plausibility with both human judges and an LMM-as-a-judge approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-03T17:59:56Z)
• Exploring Bias in over 100 Text-to-Image Generative Models [49.60774626839712]
  We investigate bias trends in text-to-image generative models over time, focusing on the increasing availability of models through open platforms like Hugging Face. We assess bias across three key dimensions: (i) distribution bias, (ii) generative hallucination, and (iii) generative miss-rate. Our findings indicate that artistic and style-transferred models exhibit significant bias, whereas foundation models, benefiting from broader training distributions, are becoming progressively less biased.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-11T03:40:44Z)
• Multimodal Approaches to Fair Image Classification: An Ethical Perspective [0.0]
  This thesis explores the intersection of technology and ethics in the development of fair image classification models.<n>I focus on improving fairness and methods of using multiple modalities to combat harmful demographic bias.<n>The study critically examines existing biases in image datasets and classification algorithms, proposes innovative methods for mitigating these biases, and evaluates the ethical implications of deploying such systems in real-world scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-11T19:58:31Z)
• On the Fairness, Diversity and Reliability of Text-to-Image Generative Models [49.60774626839712]
  multimodal generative models have sparked critical discussions on their fairness, reliability, and potential for misuse. We propose an evaluation framework designed to assess model reliability through their responses to perturbations in the embedding space. Our method lays the groundwork for detecting unreliable, bias-injected models and retrieval of bias provenance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-21T09:46:55Z)
• From Efficiency to Equity: Measuring Fairness in Preference Learning [3.2132738637761027]
  We evaluate fairness in preference learning models inspired by economic theories of inequality and Rawlsian justice. We propose metrics adapted from the Gini Coefficient, Atkinson Index, and Kuznets Ratio to quantify fairness in these models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-24T15:25:56Z)
• BIGbench: A Unified Benchmark for Social Bias in Text-to-Image Generative Models Based on Multi-modal LLM [8.24274551090375]
  We introduce BIGbench, a unified benchmark for Biases of Image Generation. Unlike existing benchmarks, BIGbench classifies and evaluates biases across four dimensions. Our study also reveal new research directions about biases, such as the effect of distillation and irrelevant protected attributes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-21T18:09:40Z)
• 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)
• Learning for Counterfactual Fairness from Observational Data [62.43249746968616]
  Fairness-aware machine learning aims to eliminate biases of learning models against certain subgroups described by certain protected (sensitive) attributes such as race, gender, and age. A prerequisite for existing methods to achieve counterfactual fairness is the prior human knowledge of the causal model for the data. In this work, we address the problem of counterfactually fair prediction from observational data without given causal models by proposing a novel framework CLAIRE.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-17T04:08:29Z)
• 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)
• Stable Bias: Analyzing Societal Representations in Diffusion Models [72.27121528451528]
  We propose a new method for exploring the social biases in Text-to-Image (TTI) systems. Our approach relies on characterizing the variation in generated images triggered by enumerating gender and ethnicity markers in the prompts. We leverage this method to analyze images generated by 3 popular TTI systems and find that while all of their outputs show correlations with US labor demographics, they also consistently under-represent marginalized identities to different extents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-20T19:32:49Z)
• Fairness Increases Adversarial Vulnerability [50.90773979394264]
  This paper shows the existence of a dichotomy between fairness and robustness, and analyzes when achieving fairness decreases the model robustness to adversarial samples. Experiments on non-linear models and different architectures validate the theoretical findings in multiple vision domains. The paper proposes a simple, yet effective, solution to construct models achieving good tradeoffs between fairness and robustness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-21T19:55:35Z)
• Fairness Indicators for Systematic Assessments of Visual Feature Extractors [21.141633753573764]
  We propose three fairness indicators, which aim at quantifying harms and biases of visual systems. Our indicators use existing publicly available datasets collected for fairness evaluations. These indicators are not intended to be a substitute for a thorough analysis of the broader impact of the new computer vision technologies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-15T17:45:33Z)

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.