mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Human-Imitating Metrics for Training and Evaluating Privacy Preserving Emotion Recognition Models Using Sociolinguistic Knowledge

arXiv 2104.08792 ↗First posted 18 Apr 2021cs.CL cs.HCcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Privacy preservation is a crucial component of any real-world application. But, in applications relying on machine learning backends, privacy is challenging because models often capture more than what the model was initially trained for, resulting in the potential leakage of sensitive information. In this paper, we propose an automatic and quantifiable metric that allows us to evaluate humans' perception of a model's ability to preserve privacy with respect to sensitive variables. In this paper, we focus on saliency-based explanations, explanations that highlight regions of the input text, to infer internal workings of a black box model. We use the degree with which differences in interpretation of general vs privacy preserving models correlate with sociolinguistic biases to inform metric design. We show how certain commonly-used methods that seek to preserve privacy do not align with human perception of privacy preservation leading to distrust about model's claims. We demonstrate the versatility of our proposed metric by validating its utility for measuring cross corpus generalization for both privacy and emotion. Finally, we conduct crowdsourcing experiments to evaluate the inclination of the evaluators to choose a particular model for a given purpose when model explanations are provided, and show a positive relationship with the proposed metric. To the best of our knowledge, we take the first step in proposing automatic and quantifiable metrics that best align with human perception of model's ability for privacy preservation, allowing for cost-effective model development.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 Apr 2021.

Builds on

22 of 43 references.

References · 22

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
  2. 2013Intriguing properties of neural networkscited by 5,114
  3. 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,350
  4. 2014Unsupervised Domain Adaptation by Backpropagationcited by 1,906
  5. 2016Man is to Computer Programmer as Woman is to Homemaker? Debiasing Word Embeddingscited by 1,304
  6. 2018The Secret Sharer: Evaluating and Testing Unintended Memorization in Neural Networkscited by 847
  7. 2020Captum: A unified and generic model interpretability library for PyTorchcited by 542
  8. 2019Learning the Difference that Makes a Difference with Counterfactually-Augmented Datacited by 428
  9. 2020An Investigation of Why Overparameterization Exacerbates Spurious Correlationscited by 310
  10. 2019Mitigating Gender Bias in Natural Language Processing: Literature Reviewcited by 287
  11. 2018Analysis Methods in Neural Language Processing: A Surveycited by 276
  12. 2019Racial Bias in Hate Speech and Abusive Language Detection Datasetscited by 208
10 more
  1. 2019Learning to Deceive with Attention-Based Explanationscited by 111
  2. 2020When Machine Learning Meets Privacy: A Survey and Outlookcited by 67
  3. 2018Towards Accountable AI: Hybrid Human-Machine Analyses for Characterizing System Failurecited by 49
  4. 2019Quantifying Interpretability and Trust in Machine Learning Systemscited by 49
  5. 2018Stakeholders in Explainable AIcited by 48
  6. 2018What are the biases in my word embedding?cited by 30
  7. 2018Speaker-Invariant Training via Adversarial Learningcited by 23
  8. 2019Privacy Enhanced Multimodal Neural Representations for Emotion Recognitioncited by 22
  9. 2020Privacy-Preserving Image Classification in the Local Settingcited by 2
  10. 2020More Than Accuracy: Towards Trustworthy Machine Learning Interfaces for Object Recognitioncited by 2

Built on by

Not cited yet.