Fairness measures for biometric quality assessment
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- The paper examines fairness measures for assessing the quality of biometric systems.
- It explores how demographic factors like age, gender, and race can impact the performance of biometric systems.
- The goal is to develop quality assessment metrics that are sensitive to these demographic differentials.
Plain English Explanation
Biometric systems like facial recognition and fingerprint scanners are widely used for identification and authentication. However, research has shown that the performance of these systems can vary depending on factors like a person's age, gender, or race. This can lead to fairness issues, where certain demographic groups may experience worse accuracy or reliability from the biometric system.
The authors of this paper set out to develop new quality assessment measures that can capture these demographic differences in biometric system performance. By incorporating fairness into the evaluation of biometric quality, the goal is to ensure that these systems work equally well for people of all backgrounds.
The paper explores different mathematical approaches for quantifying fairness in biometric quality. It evaluates how well these fairness-aware quality metrics can detect and measure demographic disparities in areas like facial recognition accuracy or speaker identification reliability.
Developing fair and inclusive biometric quality assessment is an important step towards building biometric systems that are equitable and beneficial for all users, regardless of their demographic characteristics.
Technical Explanation
The paper first provides background on biometric quality assessment and the growing awareness of fairness issues in these systems. It discusses prior work on differential performance metrics and mitigating demographic biases in biometric data and algorithms.
The core of the paper presents new fairness-aware quality assessment measures. These include:
- Demographic Parity: Ensuring that the quality score distribution is similar across demographic groups.
- Equal Opportunity: Requiring that the true positive rate (e.g. identification accuracy) is equal for all groups.
- Predictive Equality: Aiming for equal false positive and false negative rates across groups.
The authors evaluate these fairness metrics on biometric datasets, comparing their ability to detect and quantify demographic differentials in quality compared to traditional quality measures. They also explore how these fairness-aware metrics can be integrated into a quality-guided biometric system design, like the Utility Guided Fingerphoto Quality Assessment (UFQA) framework.
Critical Analysis
The paper makes a compelling case for the importance of fairness in biometric quality assessment. The proposed fairness metrics provide a rigorous mathematical framework for measuring demographic disparities in biometric system performance.
However, the authors acknowledge that implementing these fairness measures in practice may face challenges. Collecting representative demographic data, balancing multiple fairness objectives, and navigating legal/ethical considerations around demographic categorization are some potential hurdles.
The paper also does not address the root causes of biometric unfairness, such as biased training data or algorithmic design choices. Further research is needed to develop comprehensive strategies for building fair and inclusive biometric systems from the ground up.
Additionally, the evaluation in the paper is limited to relatively small-scale biometric datasets. Assessing the scalability and robustness of the fairness metrics on real-world, large-scale biometric deployments would be an important area for future work.
Conclusion
This paper makes an important contribution by introducing fairness-aware quality assessment measures for biometric systems. By incorporating demographic parity, equal opportunity, and predictive equality into biometric quality evaluation, the proposed approach can help identify and mitigate unfairness issues.
Ensuring fair and inclusive biometric quality is a critical step towards developing biometric technologies that work equitably for people of all backgrounds. The frameworks presented in this paper provide a strong foundation for further research and practical applications in this vital area.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
0
Fairness measures for biometric quality assessment
Andr'e Dorsch, Torsten Schlett, Peter Munch, Christian Rathgeb, Christoph Busch
Quality assessment algorithms measure the quality of a captured biometric sample. Since the sample quality strongly affects the recognition performance of a biometric system, it is essential to only process samples of sufficient quality and discard samples of low-quality. Even though quality assessment algorithms are not intended to yield very different quality scores across demographic groups, quality score discrepancies are possible, resulting in different discard ratios. To ensure that quality assessment algorithms do not take demographic characteristics into account when assessing sample quality and consequently to ensure that the quality algorithms perform equally for all individuals, it is crucial to develop a fairness measure. In this work we propose and compare multiple fairness measures for evaluating quality components across demographic groups. Proposed measures, could be used as potential candidates for an upcoming standard in this important field.
Read more8/22/2024
0
Score Normalization for Demographic Fairness in Face Recognition
Yu Linghu, Tiago de Freitas Pereira, Christophe Ecabert, S'ebastien Marcel, Manuel Gunther
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.
Read more7/23/2024
0
Toward Fairer Face Recognition Datasets
Alexandre Fournier-Mongieux, Michael Soumm, Adrian Popescu, Bertrand Luvison, Herv'e Le Borgne
Face recognition and verification are two computer vision tasks whose performance has progressed with the introduction of deep representations. However, ethical, legal, and technical challenges due to the sensitive character of face data and biases in real training datasets hinder their development. Generative AI addresses privacy by creating fictitious identities, but fairness problems persist. We promote fairness by introducing a demographic attributes balancing mechanism in generated training datasets. We experiment with an existing real dataset, three generated training datasets, and the balanced versions of a diffusion-based dataset. We propose a comprehensive evaluation that considers accuracy and fairness equally and includes a rigorous regression-based statistical analysis of attributes. The analysis shows that balancing reduces demographic unfairness. Also, a performance gap persists despite generation becoming more accurate with time. The proposed balancing method and comprehensive verification evaluation promote fairer and transparent face recognition and verification.
Read more6/26/2024
🚀
0
A Comparison of Differential Performance Metrics for the Evaluation of Automatic Speaker Verification Fairness
Oubaida Chouchane, Christoph Busch, Chiara Galdi, Nicholas Evans, Massimiliano Todisco
When decisions are made and when personal data is treated by automated processes, there is an expectation of fairness -- that members of different demographic groups receive equitable treatment. This expectation applies to biometric systems such as automatic speaker verification (ASV). We present a comparison of three candidate fairness metrics and extend previous work performed for face recognition, by examining differential performance across a range of different ASV operating points. Results show that the Gini Aggregation Rate for Biometric Equitability (GARBE) is the only one which meets three functional fairness measure criteria. Furthermore, a comprehensive evaluation of the fairness and verification performance of five state-of-the-art ASV systems is also presented. Our findings reveal a nuanced trade-off between fairness and verification accuracy underscoring the complex interplay between system design, demographic inclusiveness, and verification reliability.
Read more4/30/2024