Paper detail

The Gender Gap in Face Recognition Accuracy Is a Hairy Problem

It is broadly accepted that there is a "gender gap" in face recognition accuracy, with females having higher false match and false non-match rates. However, relatively little is known about the cause(s) of this gender gap. Even the recent NIST report on demographic effects lists "analyze cause and effect" under "what we did not do". We first demonstrate that female and male hairstyles have important differences that impact face recognition accuracy. In particular, compared to females, male facial hair contributes to creating a greater average difference in appearance between different male faces. We then demonstrate that when the data used to estimate recognition accuracy is balanced across gender for how hairstyles occlude the face, the initially observed gender gap in accuracy largely disappears. We show this result for two different matchers, and analyzing images of Caucasians and of African-Americans. These results suggest that future research on demographic variation in accuracy should include a check for balanced quality of the test data as part of the problem formulation. To promote reproducible research, matchers, attribute classifiers, and datasets used in this research are/will be publicly available.

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.