Paper detail

Markedness in Visual Semantic AI

We evaluate the state-of-the-art multimodal "visual semantic" model CLIP ("Contrastive Language Image Pretraining") for biases related to the marking of age, gender, and race or ethnicity. Given the option to label an image as "a photo of a person" or to select a label denoting race or ethnicity, CLIP chooses the "person" label 47.9% of the time for White individuals, compared with 5.0% or less for individuals who are Black, East Asian, Southeast Asian, Indian, or Latino or Hispanic. The model is more likely to rank the unmarked "person" label higher than labels denoting gender for Male individuals (26.7% of the time) vs. Female individuals (15.2% of the time). Age affects whether an individual is marked by the model: Female individuals under the age of 20 are more likely than Male individuals to be marked with a gender label, but less likely to be marked with an age label, while Female individuals over the age of 40 are more likely to be marked based on age than Male individuals. We also examine the self-similarity (mean pairwise cosine similarity) for each social group, where higher self-similarity denotes greater attention directed by CLIP to the shared characteristics (age, race, or gender) of the social group. As age increases, the self-similarity of representations of Female individuals increases at a higher rate than for Male individuals, with the disparity most pronounced at the "more than 70" age range. All ten of the most self-similar social groups are individuals under the age of 10 or over the age of 70, and six of the ten are Female individuals. Existing biases of self-similarity and markedness between Male and Female gender groups are further exacerbated when the groups compared are individuals who are White and Male and individuals who are Black and Female. Results indicate that CLIP reflects the biases of the language and society which produced its training data.

preprint2022arXivOpen 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.