Paper detail

Investigating Bias and Fairness in Facial Expression Recognition

Recognition of expressions of emotions and affect from facial images is a well-studied research problem in the fields of affective computing and computer vision with a large number of datasets available containing facial images and corresponding expression labels. However, virtually none of these datasets have been acquired with consideration of fair distribution across the human population. Therefore, in this work, we undertake a systematic investigation of bias and fairness in facial expression recognition by comparing three different approaches, namely a baseline, an attribute-aware and a disentangled approach, on two well-known datasets, RAF-DB and CelebA. Our results indicate that: (i) data augmentation improves the accuracy of the baseline model, but this alone is unable to mitigate the bias effect; (ii) both the attribute-aware and the disentangled approaches fortified with data augmentation perform better than the baseline approach in terms of accuracy and fairness; (iii) the disentangled approach is the best for mitigating demographic bias; and (iv) the bias mitigation strategies are more suitable in the existence of uneven attribute distribution or imbalanced number of subgroup data.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.