Right for the Right Latent Factors: Debiasing Generative Models via Disentanglement
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
A key assumption of most statistical machine learning methods is that they have access to independent samples from the distribution of data they encounter at test time. As such, these methods often perform poorly in the face of biased data, which breaks this assumption. In particular, machine learning models have been shown to exhibit Clever-Hans-like behaviour, meaning that spurious correlations in the training set are inadvertently learnt. A number of works have been proposed to revise deep classifiers to learn the right correlations. However, generative models have been overlooked so far. We observe that generative models are also prone to Clever-Hans-like behaviour. To counteract this issue, we propose to debias generative models by disentangling their internal representations, which is achieved via human feedback. Our experiments show that this is effective at removing bias even when human feedback covers only a small fraction of the desired distribution. In addition, we achieve strong disentanglement results in a quantitative comparison with recent methods.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 33 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Feb 2022.
Builds on
33 of 44 references.
References · 33
- 2013Auto-Encoding Variational Bayescited by 3,980
- 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,000
- 2018ImageNet-trained CNNs are biased towards texture; increasing shape bias improves accuracy and robustnesscited by 1,430
- 2018Challenging Common Assumptions in the Unsupervised Learning of Disentangled Representationscited by 929
- 2018Disentangling by Factorisingcited by 614
- 2019Variational Autoencoders and Nonlinear ICA: A Unifying Frameworkcited by 494
- 2019Unmasking Clever Hans Predictors and Assessing What Machines Really Learncited by 359
- 2018Understanding disentangling in β-VAEcited by 332
- 2017Right for the Right Reasons: Training Differentiable Models by Constraining their Explanationscited by 293
- 2018Learning Not to Learn: Training Deep Neural Networks with Biased Datacited by 255
- 2017Variational Inference of Disentangled Latent Concepts from Unlabeled Observationscited by 240
- 2020Weakly-Supervised Disentanglement Without Compromisescited by 237
21 more
- 2019Learning De-biased Representations with Biased Representationscited by 199
- 2019Flexibly Fair Representation Learning by Disentanglementcited by 196
- 2018Isolating Sources of Disentanglement in Variational Autoencoderscited by 167
- 2017DARLA: Improving Zero-Shot Transfer in Reinforcement Learningcited by 147
- 2019On the Fairness of Disentangled Representationscited by 144
- 2019Interpretations are useful: penalizing explanations to align neural networks with prior knowledgecited by 144
- 2020Making deep neural networks right for the right scientific reasons by interacting with their explanationscited by 141
- 2019Taking a HINT: Leveraging Explanations to Make Vision and Language Models More Groundedcited by 127
- 2019Fair Generative Modeling via Weak Supervisioncited by 114
- 2018Learning Deep Disentangled Embeddings with the F-Statistic Losscited by 101
- 2017Multi-Level Variational Autoencoder: Learning Disentangled Representations from Grouped Observationscited by 100
- 2019Are Disentangled Representations Helpful for Abstract Visual Reasoning?cited by 100
- 2020Disentanglement by Nonlinear ICA with General Incompressible-flow Networks (GIN)cited by 91
- 2015A Deeper Look at Dataset Biascited by 86
- 2019Weakly Supervised Disentanglement with Guaranteescited by 82
- 2019Disentangled Representation Learning in Cardiac Image Analysiscited by 69
- 2018Beyond Word Importance: Contextual Decomposition to Extract Interactions from LSTMscited by 67
- 2019Disentangling Factors of Variation Using Few Labelscited by 57
- 2017Cognitive Psychology for Deep Neural Networks: A Shape Bias Case Studycited by 46
- 2019Improving performance of deep learning models with axiomatic attribution priors and expected gradientscited by 32
- 2019Weakly Supervised Disentanglement by Pairwise Similaritiescited by 22
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2022: 1; 2023: 0; 2024: 1.
2 papers.