TrustSkin: A Fairness Pipeline for Trustworthy Facial Affect Analysis Across Skin Tone
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Understanding how facial affect analysis (FAA) systems perform across different demographic groups requires reliable measurement of sensitive attributes such as ancestry, often approximated by skin tone, which itself is highly influenced by lighting conditions. This study compares two objective skin tone classification methods: the widely used Individual Typology Angle (ITA) and a perceptually grounded alternative based on Lightness (L^*) and Hue (H^*). Using AffectNet and a MobileNet-based model, we assess fairness across skin tone groups defined by each method. Results reveal a severe underrepresentation of dark skin tones (~ 2 %), alongside fairness disparities in F1-score (up to 0.08) and TPR (up to 0.11) across groups. While ITA shows limitations due to its sensitivity to lighting, the H^*-L^* method yields more consistent subgrouping and enables clearer diagnostics through metrics such as Equal Opportunity. Grad-CAM analysis further highlights differences in model attention patterns by skin tone, suggesting variation in feature encoding. To support future mitigation efforts, we also propose a modular fairness-aware pipeline that integrates perceptual skin tone estimation, model interpretability, and fairness evaluation. These findings emphasize the relevance of skin tone measurement choices in fairness assessment and suggest that ITA-based evaluations may overlook disparities affecting darker-skinned individuals.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 51 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 May 2025.
Builds on
23 of 51 references.
References · 23
- 2016Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localizationcited by 6,733
- 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,007
- 2017AffectNet: A Database for Facial Expression, Valence, and Arousal Computing in the Wildcited by 492
- 2020Demographic Bias in Biometrics: A Survey on an Emerging Challengecited by 93
- 2020Investigating Bias and Fairness in Facial Expression Recognitioncited by 87
- 2021Towards Measuring Fairness in AI: the Casual Conversations Datasetcited by 80
- 2019Diversity in Facescited by 77
- 2023FACET: Fairness in Computer Vision Evaluation Benchmarkcited by 58
- 2022Meta Balanced Network for Fair Face Recognitioncited by 53
- 2021One Label, One Billion Faces: Usage and Consistency of Racial Categories in Computer Visioncited by 33
- 2019Estimating Skin Tone and Effects on Classification Performance in Dermatology Datasetscited by 29
- 2023Consensus and Subjectivity of Skin Tone Annotation for ML Fairnesscited by 22
11 more
- 2023Beyond Skin Tone: A Multidimensional Measure of Apparent Skin Colorcited by 17
- 2017Human Skin Detection Using RGB, HSV and YCbCr Color Modelscited by 16
- 2024Fairness and Bias Mitigation in Computer Vision: A Surveycited by 13
- 2022Bias and Fairness on Multimodal Emotion Detection Algorithmscited by 10
- 2024Achieve Fairness without Demographics for Dermatological Disease Diagnosiscited by 10
- 2023Racial Bias within Face Recognition: A Surveycited by 9
- 2022The Impact of Racial Distribution in Training Data on Face Recognition Bias: A Closer Lookcited by 7
- 2021Focused LRP: Explainable AI for Face Morphing Attack Detectioncited by 6
- 2025Faces of Fairness: Examining Bias in Facial Expression Recognition Datasets and Modelscited by 6
- 2023Addressing Racial Bias in Facial Emotion Recognitioncited by 4
- 2024Towards Fairness in AI for Melanoma Detection: Systemic Review and Recommendationscited by 3
Built on by
Not cited yet.