Cited by 206Ethics and Social Impacts of AIFace recognition and analysisExplainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)

Uncovering and Mitigating Algorithmic Bias through Learned Latent Structure

Open access
Amini, Alexander, Soleimany, Ava P., Schwarting, Wilko, Bhatia, Sangeeta N., Rus, Daniela·2019·Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society

Abstract

Recent research has highlighted the vulnerabilities of modern machine learning based systems to bias, especially towards segments of society that are under-represented in training data. In this work, we develop a novel, tunable algorithm for mitigating the hidden, and potentially unknown, biases within training data. Our algorithm fuses the original learning task with a variational autoencoder to learn the latent structure within the dataset and then adaptively uses the learned latent distributions to re-weight the importance of certain data points while training. While our method is generalizable across various data modalities and learning tasks, in this work we use our algorithm to address the issue of racial and gender bias in facial detection systems. We evaluate our algorithm on the Pilot Parliaments Benchmark (PPB), a dataset specifically designed to evaluate biases in computer vision systems, and demonstrate increased overall performance as well as decreased categorical bias with our debiasing approach.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3306618.3314243

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Recent developments in bias detection and mitigation include adopting re-sampling, adversarial learning, and open-source toolkits such as IBM AI Fairness 360 (AIF360) and Aequitas.

    “Recent developments in bias detection and mitigation also include methods such as adopting re-sampling118, adversarial learning119, and open-source toolkits such as IBM AI Fairness 360 (AIF360) (aif360.mybluemix.net) and Aequitas (dsapp.uchicago.edu/projects/aequitas).”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 34 · Cited by 206

Authors
Amini, A., Soleimany, A. P., Schwarting, W., Bhatia, S. N., & Rus, D.
Affiliations
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the 2019 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society
Publisher
ACM
Published
2019-01-27
Pages
289-295
ISSN
3065-8365 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2957285709
Cited by
206
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 12
FWCI
31.57
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI Ethics and Society (publishedVersion)
  • DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
Funders
National Science Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Face recognition and analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
Keywords
algorithmic bias, bias mitigation, latent structure learning, variational autoencoder, underrepresented groups, racial bias, gender bias, face detection, facial analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review