One Label, One Billion Faces: Usage and Consistency of Racial Categories in Computer Vision

By Zaid Khan, Yun Raymond Fu. 2021

64 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Computer vision is widely deployed, has highly visible, society-altering applications, and documented problems with bias and representation. Datasets are critical for benchmarking progress in fair computer vision, and often employ broad racial categories as population groups for measuring group fairness. Similarly, diversity is often measured in computer vision datasets by ascribing and counting categorical race labels. However, racial categories are ill-defined, unstable temporally and geographically, and have a problematic history of scientific use. Although the racial categories used across datasets are superficially similar, the complexity of human race perception suggests the racial system encoded by one dataset may be substantially inconsistent with another. Using the insight that a classifier can learn the racial system encoded by a dataset, we conduct an empirical study of computer vision datasets supplying categorical race labels for face images to determine the cross-dataset consistency and generalization of racial categories. We find that each dataset encodes a substantially unique racial system, despite nominally equivalent racial categories, and some racial categories are systemically less consistent than others across datasets. We find evidence that racial categories encode stereotypes, and exclude ethnic groups from categories on the basis of nonconformity to stereotypes. Representing a billion humans under one racial category may obscure disparities and create new ones by encoding stereotypes of racial systems. The difficulty of adequately converting the abstract concept of race into a tool for measuring fairness underscores the need for a method more flexible and culturally aware than racial categories.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, Safety Research, AI Ethics, Fairness & Society

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Artificial Intelligence

In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition

In Safety Research

In AI Ethics, Fairness & Society

Citations in the corpus

Understanding and Evaluating Racial Biases in Image Captioning (2021, background): “Race and gender annotations are fundamentally imperfect [29, 41, 61].”
Quantifying Societal Bias Amplification in Image Captioning (2022, background): “For example, the classification of race is controversial and strongly associated with the cultural values of each annotator [21], whereas gender is commonly classified as a binary {female,male} attribute, lacking inclusiveness with non-binary and other-gender realities.”
Moving beyond “algorithmic bias is a data problem” (2021, background): “For example, it is hard to align on a standard taxonomy—categories attributed to race or gender are frequently encoded in inconsistent ways across datasets.(2) Furthermore, procuring labels for these legally protected attributes is often perceived as intrusive leading to noisy or incomplete labels.”