VB-Mitigator: An Open-source Framework for Evaluating and Advancing Visual Bias Mitigation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2507.18348v1
• Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2025 12:20:00 GMT
• Title: VB-Mitigator: An Open-source Framework for Evaluating and Advancing Visual Bias Mitigation
• Abstract summary: VB-Mitigator is an open-source framework designed to streamline the development, evaluation, and comparative analysis of visual bias mitigation techniques.<n>VB-Mitigator offers a unified research environment encompassing 12 established mitigation methods, 7 diverse benchmark datasets.
• Score: 19.140362626182856
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Bias in computer vision models remains a significant challenge, often resulting in unfair, unreliable, and non-generalizable AI systems. Although research into bias mitigation has intensified, progress continues to be hindered by fragmented implementations and inconsistent evaluation practices. Disparate datasets and metrics used across studies complicate reproducibility, making it difficult to fairly assess and compare the effectiveness of various approaches. To overcome these limitations, we introduce the Visual Bias Mitigator (VB-Mitigator), an open-source framework designed to streamline the development, evaluation, and comparative analysis of visual bias mitigation techniques. VB-Mitigator offers a unified research environment encompassing 12 established mitigation methods, 7 diverse benchmark datasets. A key strength of VB-Mitigator is its extensibility, allowing for seamless integration of additional methods, datasets, metrics, and models. VB-Mitigator aims to accelerate research toward fairness-aware computer vision models by serving as a foundational codebase for the research community to develop and assess their approaches. To this end, we also recommend best evaluation practices and provide a comprehensive performance comparison among state-of-the-art methodologies.

Related papers

• Chart Deep Research in LVLMs via Parallel Relative Policy Optimization [39.633965546999605]
  Current chart data intelligence exhibits significant limitations in deep research capabilities.<n>We propose PRPO, which performs parallel optimization across reward dimensions and capability across data types.<n>We construct MCDR-Bench based on the error uniqueness principle," transforming subjective generation assessment into objective error identification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-03T14:50:33Z)
• AI-Generated Image Detection: An Empirical Study and Future Research Directions [6.891145787446519]
  Threats posed by AI-generated media, particularly deepfakes, are raising significant challenges for forensics.<n>Several forensic methods have been proposed, they suffer from three critical gaps.<n>These limitations hinder fair comparison, obscure true robustness, and restrict deployment in security-critical applications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-04T18:13:48Z)
• Rethinking Evaluation of Infrared Small Target Detection [105.59753496831739]
  This paper introduces a hybrid-level metric incorporating pixel- and target-level performance, proposing a systematic error analysis method, and emphasizing the importance of cross-dataset evaluation.<n>An open-source toolkit has be released to facilitate standardized benchmarking.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-21T02:45:07Z)
• EVA-MILP: Towards Standardized Evaluation of MILP Instance Generation [13.49043811341421]
  Mixed-Integer Linear Programming (MILP) is fundamental to solving complex decision-making problems.<n>The proliferation of MILP instance generation methods, driven by machine learning's demand for diverse datasets, has significantly outpaced standardized evaluation techniques.<n>This paper introduces a comprehensive benchmark framework designed for the systematic and objective evaluation of MILP instance generation methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-30T16:42:15Z)
• Causality can systematically address the monsters under the bench(marks) [64.36592889550431]
  Benchmarks are plagued by various biases, artifacts, or leakage.<n>Models may behave unreliably due to poorly explored failure modes.<n> causality offers an ideal framework to systematically address these challenges.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-07T17:01:37Z)
• Rethinking Relation Extraction: Beyond Shortcuts to Generalization with a Debiased Benchmark [53.876493664396506]
  Benchmarks are crucial for evaluating machine learning algorithm performance, facilitating comparison and identifying superior solutions.<n>This paper addresses the issue of entity bias in relation extraction tasks, where models tend to rely on entity mentions rather than context.<n>We propose a debiased relation extraction benchmark DREB that breaks the pseudo-correlation between entity mentions and relation types through entity replacement.<n>To establish a new baseline on DREB, we introduce MixDebias, a debiasing method combining data-level and model training-level techniques.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-02T17:01:06Z)
• Regularized Contrastive Partial Multi-view Outlier Detection [76.77036536484114]
  We propose a novel method named Regularized Contrastive Partial Multi-view Outlier Detection (RCPMOD) In this framework, we utilize contrastive learning to learn view-consistent information and distinguish outliers by the degree of consistency. Experimental results on four benchmark datasets demonstrate that our proposed approach could outperform state-of-the-art competitors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-02T14:34:27Z)
• Improving the Validity and Practical Usefulness of AI/ML Evaluations Using an Estimands Framework [2.4861619769660637]
  We propose an estimands framework adapted from international clinical trials guidelines. This framework provides a systematic structure for inference and reporting in evaluations. We demonstrate how the framework can help uncover underlying issues, their causes, and potential solutions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-14T18:47:37Z)
• A Comprehensive Library for Benchmarking Multi-class Visual Anomaly Detection [52.228708947607636]
  This paper proposes a comprehensive visual anomaly detection benchmark, ADer, which is a modular framework for new methods.<n>The benchmark includes multiple datasets from industrial and medical domains, implementing fifteen state-of-the-art methods and nine comprehensive metrics.<n>We objectively reveal the strengths and weaknesses of different methods and provide insights into the challenges and future directions of multi-class visual anomaly detection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-05T13:40:07Z)
• Towards Evaluating Transfer-based Attacks Systematically, Practically, and Fairly [79.07074710460012]
  adversarial vulnerability of deep neural networks (DNNs) has drawn great attention. An increasing number of transfer-based methods have been developed to fool black-box DNN models. We establish a transfer-based attack benchmark (TA-Bench) which implements 30+ methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-02T15:35:58Z)
• Multivariate Time Series Anomaly Detection: Fancy Algorithms and Flawed Evaluation Methodology [2.043517674271996]
  We discuss how a normally good protocol may have weaknesses in the context of MVTS anomaly detection. We propose a simple, yet challenging, baseline based on Principal Components Analysis (PCA) that surprisingly outperforms many recent Deep Learning (DL) based approaches on popular benchmark datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-24T20:24:12Z)
• Diffusion-based Visual Counterfactual Explanations -- Towards Systematic Quantitative Evaluation [64.0476282000118]
  Latest methods for visual counterfactual explanations (VCE) harness the power of deep generative models to synthesize new examples of high-dimensional images of impressive quality. It is currently difficult to compare the performance of these VCE methods as the evaluation procedures largely vary and often boil down to visual inspection of individual examples and small scale user studies. We propose a framework for systematic, quantitative evaluation of the VCE methods and a minimal set of metrics to be used.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-11T12:22:37Z)
• Indicators of Attack Failure: Debugging and Improving Optimization of Adversarial Examples [29.385242714424624]
  evaluating robustness of machine-learning models to adversarial examples is a challenging problem. We define a set of quantitative indicators which unveil common failures in the optimization of gradient-based attacks. Our experimental analysis shows that the proposed indicators of failure can be used to visualize, debug and improve current adversarial robustness evaluations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-18T06:57:58Z)

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.