mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Beyond Performance Disparities: A Three-Level Audit of Representational Harm in CelebA

arXiv 2605.15312 ↗First posted 14 May 2026cs.CY cs.CVcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Large-scale facial datasets like CelebA are widely used in computer vision, yet the cultural biases embedded in their labels remain underexplored. Fairness research has distinguished representational from allocational harms, but audits of computer vision datasets have mostly examined categorical labels, leaving open how such harms appear in learned features and model attention. This paper examines CelebA at three levels: dataset structure, learned feature weights, and spatial attention, focusing on how gendered double standards of ageing and beauty are encoded in the data and reproduced in model behaviour. First, hierarchical clustering of 202,599 images shows that the 39 attributes organise into latent trait bundles aligned with cultural archetypes: performative femininity (youth, makeup, adornment) and professional masculinity (ageing, facial hair, formal attire). Female faces, though more often rated attractive overall, incur steep penalties when assigned to ageing or masculine-coded clusters. Second, XGBoost with SHAP analysis reveal gender-specific effects, such as adiposity reducing attractiveness only for females. Third, Grad-CAM finds that predictions for female and younger male subgroups concentrate on mid-face cues, whereas predictions for older males drift toward peripheral cues such as hair and clothing. Older males attain the highest accuracy but the lowest average precision, indicating categorical exclusion of groups outside the dataset's evaluative templates. Cultural double standards thus pass from media representation into dataset labels, feature weights, and model attention, producing two representational harms: hyper-scrutiny of women under a narrow evaluative template, and exclusion of older men from the scheme entirely. Fairness metrics focused on performance disparities mask both, underscoring the need to address representational harm in fairness research.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 26 of its 64 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 May 2026.

Builds on

26 of 64 references.

References · 26

  1. 2016Grad-CAM: Visual Explanations from Deep Networks via Gradient-based Localizationcited by 6,690
  2. 2017A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictionscited by 6,488
  3. 2014Deep Learning Face Attributes in the Wildcited by 3,679
  4. 2017StarGAN: Unified Generative Adversarial Networks for Multi-Domain Image-to-Image Translationcited by 1,036
  5. 2016Joint Face Detection and Alignment using Multi-task Cascaded Convolutional Networkscited by 895
  6. 2014Certifying and removing disparate impactcited by 715
  7. 2019Interpreting the Latent Space of GANs for Semantic Face Editingcited by 691
  8. 2018Mitigating Unwanted Biases with Adversarial Learningcited by 663
  9. 2017Men Also Like Shopping: Reducing Gender Bias Amplification using Corpus-level Constraintscited by 420
  10. 2017AttGAN: Facial Attribute Editing by Only Changing What You Wantcited by 241
  11. 2020Large image datasets: A pyrrhic win for computer vision?cited by 237
  12. 2018Women also Snowboard: Overcoming Bias in Captioning Modelscited by 236
14 more
  1. 2019Towards a Critical Race Methodology in Algorithmic Fairnesscited by 124
  2. 2020Image Representations Learned With Unsupervised Pre-Training Contain Human-like Biasescited by 107
  3. 2015Attribute2Image: Conditional Image Generation from Visual Attributescited by 93
  4. 2020Investigating Bias and Fairness in Facial Expression Recognitioncited by 87
  5. 2021Do Datasets Have Politics? Disciplinary Values in Computer Vision Dataset Developmentcited by 85
  6. 2021A Survey on Bias in Visual Datasetscited by 84
  7. 2020Face Recognition: Too Bias, or Not Too Bias?cited by 82
  8. 2019RelGAN: Multi-Domain Image-to-Image Translation via Relative Attributescited by 56
  9. 2021Understanding and Mitigating Annotation Bias in Facial Expression Recognitioncited by 50
  10. 2016MOON: A Mixed Objective Optimization Network for the Recognition of Facial Attributescited by 34
  11. 2020Towards Accuracy-Fairness Paradox: Adversarial Example-based Data Augmentation for Visual Debiasingcited by 32
  12. 2021Are Bias Mitigation Techniques for Deep Learning Effective?cited by 14
  13. 2025Attention IoU: Examining Biases in CelebA using Attention Mapscited by 3
  14. 2022Distraction is All You Need for Fairnesscited by 2

Built on by

Not cited yet.