mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Score Normalization for Demographic Fairness in Face Recognition

arXiv 2407.14087 ↗First posted 19 Jul 2024cs.CVcited by 4

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Fair biometric algorithms have similar verification performance across different demographic groups given a single decision threshold. Unfortunately, for state-of-the-art face recognition networks, score distributions differ between demographics. Contrary to work that tries to align those distributions by extra training or fine-tuning, we solely focus on score post-processing methods. As proved, well-known sample-centered score normalization techniques, Z-norm and T-norm, do not improve fairness for high-security operating points. Thus, we extend the standard Z/T-norm to integrate demographic information in normalization. Additionally, we investigate several possibilities to incorporate cohort similarities for both genuine and impostor pairs per demographic to improve fairness across different operating points. We run experiments on two datasets with different demographics (gender and ethnicity) and show that our techniques generally improve the overall fairness of five state-of-the-art pre-trained face recognition networks, without downgrading verification performance. We also indicate that an equal contribution of False Match Rate (FMR) and False Non-Match Rate (FNMR) in fairness evaluation is required for the highest gains. Code and protocols are available.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 29 of its 69 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Jul 2024.

Builds on

29 of 69 references.

References · 29

  1. 2015Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognitioncited by 52,096
  2. 2017Squeeze-and-Excitation Networkscited by 4,789
  3. 2018CosFace: Large Margin Cosine Loss for Deep Face Recognitioncited by 971
  4. 2017VGGFace2: A dataset for recognising faces across pose and agecited by 914
  5. 2017SphereFace: Deep Hypersphere Embedding for Face Recognitioncited by 737
  6. 2016MS-Celeb-1M: A Dataset and Benchmark for Large-Scale Face Recognitioncited by 624
  7. 2022AdaFace: Quality Adaptive Margin for Face Recognitioncited by 391
  8. 2021MagFace: A Universal Representation for Face Recognition and Quality Assessmentcited by 334
  9. 2018Deep Face Recognition: A Surveycited by 276
  10. 2021WebFace260M: A Benchmark Unveiling the Power of Million-Scale Deep Face Recognitioncited by 223
  11. 2019Mitigate Bias in Face Recognition using Skewness-Aware Reinforcement Learningcited by 145
  12. 2018Deep Imbalanced Learning for Face Recognition and Attribute Predictioncited by 91
17 more
  1. 2020Mitigating Face Recognition Bias via Group Adaptive Classifiercited by 67
  2. 2019Accuracy comparison across face recognition algorithms: Where are we on measuring race bias?cited by 56
  3. 2020Improved Residual Networks for Image and Video Recognitioncited by 52
  4. 2020SensitiveLoss: Improving Accuracy and Fairness of Face Representations with Discrimination-Aware Deep Learningcited by 50
  5. 2020Analysis of Gender Inequality In Face Recognition Accuracycited by 47
  6. 2020Fairness in Biometrics: a figure of merit to assess biometric verification systemscited by 41
  7. 2019Characterizing the Variability in Face Recognition Accuracy Relative to Racecited by 40
  8. 2021Consistent Instance False Positive Improves Fairness in Face Recognitioncited by 40
  9. 2020How Does Gender Balance In Training Data Affect Face Recognition Accuracy?cited by 37
  10. 2016MOON: A Mixed Objective Optimization Network for the Recognition of Facial Attributescited by 34
  11. 2020Post-Comparison Mitigation of Demographic Bias in Face Recognition Using Fair Score Normalizationcited by 28
  12. 2020Is Face Recognition Sexist? No, Gendered Hairstyles and Biology Arecited by 23
  13. 2022Evaluating Proposed Fairness Models for Face Recognition Algorithmscited by 18
  14. 2019Additive Adversarial Learning for Unbiased Authenticationcited by 9
  15. 2023Toward responsible face datasets: modeling the distribution of a disentangled latent space for sampling face images from demographic groupscited by 6
  16. 2022Statistical Methods for Assessing Differences in False Non-Match Rates Across Demographic Groupscited by 4
  17. 2020Asymmetric Rejection Loss for Fairer Face Recognitioncited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 3.

4 papers.