arXiv subjects

Melissa Hall

Publications and source records attributed to Melissa Hall.

29 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

arXiv2024

DIG In: Evaluating Disparities in Image Generations with Indicators for Geographic Diversity

The unprecedented photorealistic results achieved by recent text-to-image generative systems and their increasing use as plug-and-play content creation solutions make it crucial to understand their potential biases. In this work, we introduce three indicators to evaluate the realism, diversity and prompt-generation consistency of text-to-image generative systems when prompted to generate objects from across the world. Our indicators complement qualitative analysis of the broader impact of such systems by enabling automatic and efficient benchmarking of geographic disparities, an important step towards building responsible visual content creation systems. We use our proposed indicators to analyze potential geographic biases in state-of-the-art visual content creation systems and find that: (1) models have less realism and diversity of generations when prompting for Africa and West Asia than Europe, (2) prompting with geographic information comes at a cost to prompt-consistency and diversity of generated images, and (3) models exhibit more region-level disparities for some objects than others. Perhaps most interestingly, our indicators suggest that progress in image generation quality has come at the cost of real-world geographic representation. Our comprehensive evaluation constitutes a crucial step towards ensuring a positive experience of visual content creation for everyone.

cs.CV↗

arXiv2023

Quantifying and mitigating the impact of label errors on model disparity metrics

Errors in labels obtained via human annotation adversely affect a model's performance. Existing approaches propose ways to mitigate the effect of label error on a model's downstream accuracy, yet little is known about its impact on a model's disparity metrics. Here we study the effect of label error on a model's disparity metrics. We empirically characterize how varying levels of label error, in both training and test data, affect these disparity metrics. We find that group calibration and other metrics are sensitive to train-time and test-time label error -- particularly for minority groups. This disparate effect persists even for models trained with noise-aware algorithms. To mitigate the impact of training-time label error, we present an approach to estimate the influence of a training input's label on a model's group disparity metric. We empirically assess the proposed approach on a variety of datasets and find significant improvement, compared to alternative approaches, in identifying training inputs that improve a model's disparity metric. We complement the approach with an automatic relabel-and-finetune scheme that produces updated models with, provably, improved group calibration error.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2023

VPA: Fully Test-Time Visual Prompt Adaptation

Textual prompt tuning has demonstrated significant performance improvements in adapting natural language processing models to a variety of downstream tasks by treating hand-engineered prompts as trainable parameters. Inspired by the success of textual prompting, several studies have investigated the efficacy of visual prompt tuning. In this work, we present Visual Prompt Adaptation (VPA), the first framework that generalizes visual prompting with test-time adaptation. VPA introduces a small number of learnable tokens, enabling fully test-time and storage-efficient adaptation without necessitating source-domain information. We examine our VPA design under diverse adaptation settings, encompassing single-image, batched-image, and pseudo-label adaptation. We evaluate VPA on multiple tasks, including out-of-distribution (OOD) generalization, corruption robustness, and domain adaptation. Experimental results reveal that VPA effectively enhances OOD generalization by 3.3% across various models, surpassing previous test-time approaches. Furthermore, we show that VPA improves corruption robustness by 6.5% compared to strong baselines. Finally, we demonstrate that VPA also boosts domain adaptation performance by relatively 5.2%. Our VPA also exhibits marked effectiveness in improving the robustness of zero-shot recognition for vision-language models.

cs.CV↗

arXiv2023

FACET: Fairness in Computer Vision Evaluation Benchmark

Computer vision models have known performance disparities across attributes such as gender and skin tone. This means during tasks such as classification and detection, model performance differs for certain classes based on the demographics of the people in the image. These disparities have been shown to exist, but until now there has not been a unified approach to measure these differences for common use-cases of computer vision models. We present a new benchmark named FACET (FAirness in Computer Vision EvaluaTion), a large, publicly available evaluation set of 32k images for some of the most common vision tasks - image classification, object detection and segmentation. For every image in FACET, we hired expert reviewers to manually annotate person-related attributes such as perceived skin tone and hair type, manually draw bounding boxes and label fine-grained person-related classes such as disk jockey or guitarist. In addition, we use FACET to benchmark state-of-the-art vision models and present a deeper understanding of potential performance disparities and challenges across sensitive demographic attributes. With the exhaustive annotations collected, we probe models using single demographics attributes as well as multiple attributes using an intersectional approach (e.g. hair color and perceived skin tone). Our results show that classification, detection, segmentation, and visual grounding models exhibit performance disparities across demographic attributes and intersections of attributes. These harms suggest that not all people represented in datasets receive fair and equitable treatment in these vision tasks. We hope current and future results using our benchmark will contribute to fairer, more robust vision models. FACET is available publicly at https://facet.metademolab.com/

cs.CV↗

arXiv2023

Pinpointing Why Object Recognition Performance Degrades Across Income Levels and Geographies

Despite impressive advances in object-recognition, deep learning systems' performance degrades significantly across geographies and lower income levels raising pressing concerns of inequity. Addressing such performance gaps remains a challenge, as little is understood about why performance degrades across incomes or geographies. We take a step in this direction by annotating images from Dollar Street, a popular benchmark of geographically and economically diverse images, labeling each image with factors such as color, shape, and background. These annotations unlock a new granular view into how objects differ across incomes and regions. We then use these object differences to pinpoint model vulnerabilities across incomes and regions. We study a range of modern vision models, finding that performance disparities are most associated with differences in texture, occlusion, and images with darker lighting. We illustrate how insights from our factor labels can surface mitigations to improve models' performance disparities. As an example, we show that mitigating a model's vulnerability to texture can improve performance on the lower income level. We release all the factor annotations along with an interactive dashboard to facilitate research into more equitable vision systems.

cs.CV↗

arXiv2023

Towards Reliable Assessments of Demographic Disparities in Multi-Label Image Classifiers

Disaggregated performance metrics across demographic groups are a hallmark of fairness assessments in computer vision. These metrics successfully incentivized performance improvements on person-centric tasks such as face analysis and are used to understand risks of modern models. However, there is a lack of discussion on the vulnerabilities of these measurements for more complex computer vision tasks. In this paper, we consider multi-label image classification and, specifically, object categorization tasks. First, we highlight design choices and trade-offs for measurement that involve more nuance than discussed in prior computer vision literature. These challenges are related to the necessary scale of data, definition of groups for images, choice of metric, and dataset imbalances. Next, through two case studies using modern vision models, we demonstrate that naive implementations of these assessments are brittle. We identify several design choices that look merely like implementation details but significantly impact the conclusions of assessments, both in terms of magnitude and direction (on which group the classifiers work best) of disparities. Based on ablation studies, we propose some recommendations to increase the reliability of these assessments. Finally, through a qualitative analysis we find that concepts with large disparities tend to have varying definitions and representations between groups, with inconsistencies across datasets and annotators. While this result suggests avenues for mitigation through more consistent data collection, it also highlights that ambiguous label definitions remain a challenge when performing model assessments. Vision models are expanding and becoming more ubiquitous; it is even more important that our disparity assessments accurately reflect the true performance of models.

cs.CV↗

arXiv2023

Vision-Language Models Performing Zero-Shot Tasks Exhibit Gender-based Disparities

We explore the extent to which zero-shot vision-language models exhibit gender bias for different vision tasks. Vision models traditionally required task-specific labels for representing concepts, as well as finetuning; zero-shot models like CLIP instead perform tasks with an open-vocabulary, meaning they do not need a fixed set of labels, by using text embeddings to represent concepts. With these capabilities in mind, we ask: Do vision-language models exhibit gender bias when performing zero-shot image classification, object detection and semantic segmentation? We evaluate different vision-language models with multiple datasets across a set of concepts and find (i) all models evaluated show distinct performance differences based on the perceived gender of the person co-occurring with a given concept in the image and that aggregating analyses over all concepts can mask these concerns; (ii) model calibration (i.e. the relationship between accuracy and confidence) also differs distinctly by perceived gender, even when evaluating on similar representations of concepts; and (iii) these observed disparities align with existing gender biases in word embeddings from language models. These findings suggest that, while language greatly expands the capability of vision tasks, it can also contribute to social biases in zero-shot vision settings. Furthermore, biases can further propagate when foundational models like CLIP are used by other models to enable zero-shot capabilities.

cs.CV↗

arXiv2022

"I'm sorry to hear that": Finding New Biases in Language Models with a Holistic Descriptor Dataset

As language models grow in popularity, it becomes increasingly important to clearly measure all possible markers of demographic identity in order to avoid perpetuating existing societal harms. Many datasets for measuring bias currently exist, but they are restricted in their coverage of demographic axes and are commonly used with preset bias tests that presuppose which types of biases models can exhibit. In this work, we present a new, more inclusive bias measurement dataset, HolisticBias, which includes nearly 600 descriptor terms across 13 different demographic axes. HolisticBias was assembled in a participatory process including experts and community members with lived experience of these terms. These descriptors combine with a set of bias measurement templates to produce over 450,000 unique sentence prompts, which we use to explore, identify, and reduce novel forms of bias in several generative models. We demonstrate that HolisticBias is effective at measuring previously undetectable biases in token likelihoods from language models, as well as in an offensiveness classifier. We will invite additions and amendments to the dataset, which we hope will serve as a basis for more easy-to-use and standardized methods for evaluating bias in NLP models.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2022

A Systematic Study of Bias Amplification

Recent research suggests that predictions made by machine-learning models can amplify biases present in the training data. When a model amplifies bias, it makes certain predictions at a higher rate for some groups than expected based on training-data statistics. Mitigating such bias amplification requires a deep understanding of the mechanics in modern machine learning that give rise to that amplification. We perform the first systematic, controlled study into when and how bias amplification occurs. To enable this study, we design a simple image-classification problem in which we can tightly control (synthetic) biases. Our study of this problem reveals that the strength of bias amplification is correlated to measures such as model accuracy, model capacity, model overconfidence, and amount of training data. We also find that bias amplification can vary greatly during training. Finally, we find that bias amplification may depend on the difficulty of the classification task relative to the difficulty of recognizing group membership: bias amplification appears to occur primarily when it is easier to recognize group membership than class membership. Our results suggest best practices for training machine-learning models that we hope will help pave the way for the development of better mitigation strategies. Code can be found at https://github.com/facebookresearch/cv_bias_amplification.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2022

Understanding out-of-distribution accuracies through quantifying difficulty of test samples

Existing works show that although modern neural networks achieve remarkable generalization performance on the in-distribution (ID) dataset, the accuracy drops significantly on the out-of-distribution (OOD) datasets \cite{recht2018cifar, recht2019imagenet}. To understand why a variety of models consistently make more mistakes in the OOD datasets, we propose a new metric to quantify the difficulty of the test images (either ID or OOD) that depends on the interaction of the training dataset and the model. In particular, we introduce \textit{confusion score} as a label-free measure of image difficulty which quantifies the amount of disagreement on a given test image based on the class conditional probabilities estimated by an ensemble of trained models. Using the confusion score, we investigate CIFAR-10 and its OOD derivatives. Next, by partitioning test and OOD datasets via their confusion scores, we predict the relationship between ID and OOD accuracies for various architectures. This allows us to obtain an estimator of the OOD accuracy of a given model only using ID test labels. Our observations indicate that the biggest contribution to the accuracy drop comes from images with high confusion scores. Upon further inspection, we report on the nature of the misclassified images grouped by their confusion scores: \textit{(i)} images with high confusion scores contain \textit{weak spurious correlations} that appear in multiple classes in the training data and lack clear \textit{class-specific features}, and \textit{(ii)} images with low confusion scores exhibit spurious correlations that belong to another class, namely \textit{class-specific spurious correlations}.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2021

Fairness On The Ground: Applying Algorithmic Fairness Approaches to Production Systems

Many technical approaches have been proposed for ensuring that decisions made by machine learning systems are fair, but few of these proposals have been stress-tested in real-world systems. This paper presents an example of one team's approach to the challenge of applying algorithmic fairness approaches to complex production systems within the context of a large technology company. We discuss how we disentangle normative questions of product and policy design (like, "how should the system trade off between different stakeholders' interests and needs?") from empirical questions of system implementation (like, "is the system achieving the desired tradeoff in practice?"). We also present an approach for answering questions of the latter sort, which allows us to measure how machine learning systems and human labelers are making these tradeoffs across different relevant groups. We hope our experience integrating fairness tools and approaches into large-scale and complex production systems will be useful to other practitioners facing similar challenges, and illuminating to academics and researchers looking to better address the needs of practitioners.

cs.LG↗