My Answer Is NOT 'Fair': Mitigating Social Bias in Vision-Language Models via Fair and Biased Residuals

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2505.23798v1
• Date: Mon, 26 May 2025 15:14:16 GMT
• Title: My Answer Is NOT 'Fair': Mitigating Social Bias in Vision-Language Models via Fair and Biased Residuals
• Authors: Jian Lan, Yifei Fu, Udo Schlegel, Gengyuan Zhang, Tanveer Hannan, Haokun Chen, Thomas Seidl,
• Abstract summary: We focus on evaluating and mitigating social bias on both the model's response and probability distribution.<n>We find that models suffer from generating gender-biased or race-biased responses.<n>We propose a post-hoc method for the inference stage to mitigate social bias, which is training-free and model-agnostic.
• Score: 6.321884145362591
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Social bias is a critical issue in large vision-language models (VLMs), where fairness- and ethics-related problems harm certain groups of people in society. It is unknown to what extent VLMs yield social bias in generative responses. In this study, we focus on evaluating and mitigating social bias on both the model's response and probability distribution. To do so, we first evaluate four state-of-the-art VLMs on PAIRS and SocialCounterfactuals datasets with the multiple-choice selection task. Surprisingly, we find that models suffer from generating gender-biased or race-biased responses. We also observe that models are prone to stating their responses are fair, but indeed having mis-calibrated confidence levels towards particular social groups. While investigating why VLMs are unfair in this study, we observe that VLMs' hidden layers exhibit substantial fluctuations in fairness levels. Meanwhile, residuals in each layer show mixed effects on fairness, with some contributing positively while some lead to increased bias. Based on these findings, we propose a post-hoc method for the inference stage to mitigate social bias, which is training-free and model-agnostic. We achieve this by ablating bias-associated residuals while amplifying fairness-associated residuals on model hidden layers during inference. We demonstrate that our post-hoc method outperforms the competing training strategies, helping VLMs have fairer responses and more reliable confidence levels.

Related papers

• Interpretable Debiasing of Vision-Language Models for Social Fairness [55.85977929985967]
  We introduce an interpretable, model-agnostic bias mitigation framework, DeBiasLens, that localizes social attribute neurons in Vision-Language models.<n>We train SAEs on facial image or caption datasets without corresponding social attribute labels to uncover neurons highly responsive to specific demographics.<n>Our research lays the groundwork for future auditing tools, prioritizing social fairness in emerging real-world AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-27T13:37:11Z)
• Addressing Stereotypes in Large Language Models: A Critical Examination and Mitigation [0.0]
  Large Language models (LLMs) have gained popularity in recent years with the advancement of Natural Language Processing (NLP)<n>This study inspects and highlights the need to address biases in LLMs amid growing generative Artificial Intelligence (AI)<n>We utilize bias-specific benchmarks such StereoSet and CrowSPairs to evaluate the existence of various biases in many different generative models such as BERT, GPT 3.5, and ADA.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-18T05:43:34Z)
• The Biased Samaritan: LLM biases in Perceived Kindness [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have become ubiquitous in many fields.<n>This paper provides a novel method for evaluating the demographic biases of various generative AI models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-12T23:33:42Z)
• Surface Fairness, Deep Bias: A Comparative Study of Bias in Language Models [49.41113560646115]
  We investigate various proxy measures of bias in large language models (LLMs)<n>We find that evaluating models with pre-prompted personae on a multi-subject benchmark (MMLU) leads to negligible and mostly random differences in scores.<n>With the recent trend for LLM assistant memory and personalization, these problems open up from a different angle.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-12T08:47:40Z)
• Fairness Mediator: Neutralize Stereotype Associations to Mitigate Bias in Large Language Models [66.5536396328527]
  LLMs inadvertently absorb spurious correlations from training data, leading to stereotype associations between biased concepts and specific social groups.<n>We propose Fairness Mediator (FairMed), a bias mitigation framework that neutralizes stereotype associations.<n>Our framework comprises two main components: a stereotype association prober and an adversarial debiasing neutralizer.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-10T14:23:06Z)
• Towards Large Language Models that Benefit for All: Benchmarking Group Fairness in Reward Models [16.977176752570617]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly powerful and accessible to human users.<n> Ensuring fairness across diverse demographic groups, i.e., group fairness, is a critical ethical concern.<n>This work benchmarks the group fairness of learned reward models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-10T19:39:39Z)
• Unmasking Implicit Bias: Evaluating Persona-Prompted LLM Responses in Power-Disparate Social Scenarios [4.626073646852022]
  We introduce a novel framework using cosine distance to measure semantic shifts in responses.<n>We assess how demographic prompts affect response quality across power-disparate social scenarios.<n>Our findings suggest a "default persona" bias toward middle-aged, able-bodied, native-born, Caucasian, atheistic males with centrist views.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-03T13:44:03Z)
• Where Fact Ends and Fairness Begins: Redefining AI Bias Evaluation through Cognitive Biases [77.3489598315447]
  We argue that identifying the boundary between fact and fair is essential for meaningful fairness evaluation.<n>We introduce Fact-or-Fair, a benchmark with (i) objective queries aligned with descriptive, fact-based judgments, and (ii) subjective queries aligned with normative, fairness-based judgments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-09T10:54:11Z)
• On Fairness of Unified Multimodal Large Language Model for Image Generation [19.122441856516215]
  We benchmark the latest U-MLLMs and find that most exhibit significant demographic biases, such as gender and race bias.<n>Our analysis shows that bias originates primarily from the language model.<n>We propose a novel balanced preference model to balance the demographic distribution with synthetic data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-05T18:21:03Z)
• Towards Implicit Bias Detection and Mitigation in Multi-Agent LLM Interactions [25.809599403713506]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly being employed in numerous studies to simulate societies and execute diverse social tasks. LLMs are susceptible to societal biases due to their exposure to human-generated data. This study investigates the presence of implicit gender biases in multi-agent LLM interactions and proposes two strategies to mitigate these biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-03T15:28:05Z)
• Identifying and Mitigating Social Bias Knowledge in Language Models [52.52955281662332]
  We propose a novel debiasing approach, Fairness Stamp (FAST), which enables fine-grained calibration of individual social biases.<n>FAST surpasses state-of-the-art baselines with superior debiasing performance.<n>This highlights the potential of fine-grained debiasing strategies to achieve fairness in large language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-07T17:14:58Z)
• GenderBias-\emph{VL}: Benchmarking Gender Bias in Vision Language Models via Counterfactual Probing [72.0343083866144]
  This paper introduces the GenderBias-emphVL benchmark to evaluate occupation-related gender bias in Large Vision-Language Models. Using our benchmark, we extensively evaluate 15 commonly used open-source LVLMs and state-of-the-art commercial APIs. Our findings reveal widespread gender biases in existing LVLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-30T05:55:15Z)
• VLBiasBench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Evaluating Bias in Large Vision-Language Model [72.13121434085116]
  We introduce VLBiasBench, a benchmark to evaluate biases in Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs)<n>VLBiasBench features a dataset that covers nine distinct categories of social biases, including age, disability status, gender, nationality, physical appearance, race, religion, profession, social economic status, as well as two intersectional bias categories: race x gender and race x social economic status.<n>We conduct extensive evaluations on 15 open-source models as well as two advanced closed-source models, yielding new insights into the biases present in these models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T10:56:59Z)
• A Theory of LLM Sampling: Part Descriptive and Part Prescriptive [53.08398658452411]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly utilized in autonomous decision-making.<n>We show that this sampling behavior resembles that of human decision-making.<n>We show that this deviation of a sample from the statistical norm towards a prescriptive component consistently appears in concepts across diverse real-world domains.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-16T18:28:43Z)
• Fairness-aware Class Imbalanced Learning [57.45784950421179]
  We evaluate long-tail learning methods for tweet sentiment and occupation classification. We extend a margin-loss based approach with methods to enforce fairness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-21T22:16:30Z)

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.