mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Evaluating Proposed Fairness Models for Face Recognition Algorithms

arXiv 2203.05051 ↗First posted 9 Mar 2022cs.CV cs.CY cs.LGcited by 18

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The development of face recognition algorithms by academic and commercial organizations is growing rapidly due to the onset of deep learning and the widespread availability of training data. Though tests of face recognition algorithm performance indicate yearly performance gains, error rates for many of these systems differ based on the demographic composition of the test set. These "demographic differentials" in algorithm performance can contribute to unequal or unfair outcomes for certain groups of people, raising concerns with increased worldwide adoption of face recognition systems. Consequently, regulatory bodies in both the United States and Europe have proposed new rules requiring audits of biometric systems for "discriminatory impacts" (European Union Artificial Intelligence Act) and "fairness" (U.S. Federal Trade Commission). However, no standard for measuring fairness in biometric systems yet exists. This paper characterizes two proposed measures of face recognition algorithm fairness (fairness measures) from scientists in the U.S. and Europe. We find that both proposed methods are challenging to interpret when applied to disaggregated face recognition error rates as they are commonly experienced in practice. To address this, we propose a set of interpretability criteria, termed the Functional Fairness Measure Criteria (FFMC), that outlines a set of properties desirable in a face recognition algorithm fairness measure. We further develop a new fairness measure, the Gini Aggregation Rate for Biometric Equitability (GARBE), and show how, in conjunction with the Pareto optimization, this measure can be used to select among alternative algorithms based on the accuracy/fairness trade-space. Finally, we have open-sourced our dataset of machine-readable, demographically disaggregated error rates. We believe this is currently the largest open-source dataset of its kind.

Key facts. Cited by 18 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 13 of its 81 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Mar 2022.

Builds on

13 of 81 references.

References · 13

  1. 2019A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 1,911
  2. 2016Fair prediction with disparate impact: A study of bias in recidivism prediction instrumentscited by 671
  3. 2016Inherent Trade-Offs in the Fair Determination of Risk Scorescited by 582
  4. 2017Fairness in Criminal Justice Risk Assessments: The State of the Artcited by 315
  5. 2019Measurement and Fairnesscited by 299
  6. 2020Minimax Pareto Fairness: A Multi Objective Perspectivecited by 152
  7. 201850 Years of Test (Un)fairness: Lessons for Machine Learningcited by 101
  8. 2020Demographic Bias in Biometrics: A Survey on an Emerging Challengecited by 93
  9. 2019Accuracy comparison across face recognition algorithms: Where are we on measuring race bias?cited by 56
  10. 2020Fairness in Biometrics: a figure of merit to assess biometric verification systemscited by 41
  11. 2020The Fairness-Accuracy Pareto Frontcited by 26
  12. 2020How fair can we go in machine learning? Assessing the boundaries of fairness in decision treescited by 22
1 more
  1. 2020Quantifying the Extent to Which Race and Gender Features Determine Identity in Commercial Face Recognition Algorithmscited by 5

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 7; 2025: 6; 2026: 3.

18 papers.

Sort:

By area:

  1. 2024Synthetic Data for the Mitigation of Demographic Biases in Face Recognitioncited by 10
  2. 2026The Third VoicePrivacy Challenge: Preserving Emotional Expressiveness and Linguistic Content in Voice Anonymizationcited by 8
  3. 2025Review of Demographic Fairness in Face Recognitioncited by 7
  4. 2023Keystroke Verification Challenge (KVC): Biometric and Fairness Benchmark Evaluationcited by 5
  5. 2024Score Normalization for Demographic Fairness in Face Recognitioncited by 4
  6. 2024Fairness Under Cover: Evaluating the Impact of Occlusions on Demographic Bias in Facial Recognitioncited by 3
  7. 2024KVC-onGoing: Keystroke Verification Challengecited by 3
  8. 2024Comprehensive Equity Index (CEI): Definition and Application to Bias Evaluation in Biometricscited by 2
  9. 2025On the Illusion of Gender Bias in Face Recognition: Explaining the Fairness Issue Through Non-demographic Attributescited by 2
  10. 2025Balancing Tails when Comparing Distributions: Comprehensive Equity Index (CEI) with Application to Bias Evaluation in Operational Face Biometricscited by 2
  11. 2024Sum of Group Error Differences: A Critical Examination of Bias Evaluation in Biometric Verification and a Dual-Metric Measurecited by 1
  12. 2024Fairness measures for biometric quality assessmentcited by 1
6 more
  1. 2025Accuracy and Fairness of Facial Recognition Technology in Low-Quality Police Images: An Experiment With Synthetic Facescited by 1
  2. 2025DemoBias: An Empirical Study to Trace Demographic Biases in Vision Foundation Modelscited by 1
  3. 2026Demographic Fairness in Multimodal LLMs: A Benchmark of Gender and Ethnicity Bias in Face Verificationcited by 1
  4. 2023Generalizability and Application of the Skin Reflectance Estimate Based on Dichromatic Separation (SREDS)cited by 0
  5. 2025A Responsible Face Recognition Approach for Small and Mid-Scale Systems Through Personalized Neural Networkscited by 0
  6. 2026Variational Latent Entropy Estimation Disentanglement: Controlled Attribute Leakage for Face Recognitioncited by 0