mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

What Should Be Balanced in a "Balanced" Face Recognition Dataset?

arXiv 2304.09818 ↗First posted 17 Apr 2023cs.CVcited by 13

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The issue of demographic disparities in face recognition accuracy has attracted increasing attention in recent years. Various face image datasets have been proposed as 'fair' or 'balanced' to assess the accuracy of face recognition algorithms across demographics. These datasets typically balance the number of identities and images across demographics. It is important to note that the number of identities and images in an evaluation dataset are em not driving factors for 1-to-1 face matching accuracy. Moreover, balancing the number of identities and images does not ensure balance in other factors known to impact accuracy, such as head pose, brightness, and image quality. We demonstrate these issues using several recently proposed datasets. To improve the ability to perform less biased evaluations, we propose a bias-aware toolkit that facilitates creation of cross-demographic evaluation datasets balanced on factors mentioned in this paper.

Key facts. Cited by 13 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 31 of its 65 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Apr 2023.

Builds on

31 of 65 references.

References · 31

  1. 2017VGGFace2: A dataset for recognising faces across pose and agecited by 914
  2. 2018BiSeNet: Bilateral Segmentation Network for Real-time Semantic Segmentationcited by 645
  3. 2016MS-Celeb-1M: A Dataset and Benchmark for Large-Scale Face Recognitioncited by 624
  4. 2014Learning Face Representation from Scratchcited by 453
  5. 2021MagFace: A Universal Representation for Face Recognition and Quality Assessmentcited by 334
  6. 2017Cross-Age LFW: A Database for Studying Cross-Age Face Recognition in Unconstrained Environmentscited by 260
  7. 2015The MegaFace Benchmark: 1 Million Faces for Recognition at Scalecited by 200
  8. 2016Imbalanced-learn: A Python Toolbox to Tackle the Curse of Imbalanced Datasets in Machine Learningcited by 195
  9. 2020Partial FC: Training 10 Million Identities on a Single Machinecited by 163
  10. 2020Demographic Bias in Biometrics: A Survey on an Emerging Challengecited by 93
  11. 2019FairFace: Face Attribute Dataset for Balanced Race, Gender, and Agecited by 87
  12. 2020Face Recognition: Too Bias, or Not Too Bias?cited by 82
19 more
  1. 2021Towards Measuring Fairness in AI: the Casual Conversations Datasetcited by 80
  2. 2020img2pose: Face Alignment and Detection via 6DoF, Face Pose Estimationcited by 58
  3. 2018ArcFace: Additive Angular Margin Loss for Deep Face Recognitioncited by 56
  4. 2022Meta Balanced Network for Fair Face Recognitioncited by 53
  5. 2021FaceX-Zoo: A PyTorch Toolbox for Face Recognitioncited by 49
  6. 2020Analysis of Gender Inequality In Face Recognition Accuracycited by 47
  7. 2020Biometric Quality: Review and Application to Face Recognition with FaceQnetcited by 42
  8. 2019Characterizing the Variability in Face Recognition Accuracy Relative to Racecited by 40
  9. 2020How Does Gender Balance In Training Data Affect Face Recognition Accuracy?cited by 37
  10. 2021Gendered Differences in Face Recognition Accuracy Explained by Hairstyles, Makeup, and Facial Morphologycited by 32
  11. 2021Face.evoLVe: A High-Performance Face Recognition Librarycited by 26
  12. 2021QMagFace: Simple and Accurate Quality-Aware Face Recognitioncited by 25
  13. 2022Face Recognition Accuracy Across Demographics: Shining a Light Into the Problemcited by 25
  14. 2020Is Face Recognition Sexist? No, Gendered Hairstyles and Biology Arecited by 23
  15. 2021Rethinking Common Assumptions to Mitigate Racial Bias in Face Recognition Datasetscited by 22
  16. 2019Does Face Recognition Accuracy Get Better With Age? Deep Face Matchers Say Nocited by 16
  17. 2022The Gender Gap in Face Recognition Accuracy Is a Hairy Problemcited by 15
  18. 2023Logical Consistency and Greater Descriptive Power for Facial Hair Attribute Learningcited by 15
  19. 2021Personalized Benchmarking with the Ludwig Benchmarking Toolkitcited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

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

13 papers.

Sort:

By area: