@InProceedings{MenezesFerrPereGome:2021:BiFaFa,
author = "Menezes, Hanna Fran{\c{c}}a and Ferreira, Arthur Silva Cavalcante
and Pereira, Eanes Torres and Gomes, Herman Martins",
affiliation = "{Universidade Federal de Campina Grande } and {Universidade
Federal de Campina Grande } and {Universidade Federal de Campina
Grande } and {Universidade Federal de Campina Grande}",
title = "Bias and Fairness in Face Detection",
booktitle = "Proceedings...",
year = "2021",
editor = "Paiva, Afonso and Menotti, David and Baranoski, Gladimir V. G. and
Proen{\c{c}}a, Hugo Pedro and Junior, Antonio Lopes Apolinario
and Papa, Jo{\~a}o Paulo and Pagliosa, Paulo and dos Santos,
Thiago Oliveira and e S{\'a}, Asla Medeiros and da Silveira,
Thiago Lopes Trugillo and Brazil, Emilio Vital and Ponti, Moacir
A. and Fernandes, Leandro A. F. and Avila, Sandra",
organization = "Conference on Graphics, Patterns and Images, 34. (SIBGRAPI)",
publisher = "IEEE Computer Society",
address = "Los Alamitos",
keywords = "Bias, Fairness, Face Detection.",
abstract = "Processing of face images is used in many areas, for example:
commercial applications such as video-games; facial biometrics;
facial expression recognition, etc. Face detection is a crucial
step for any system that processes face images. Therefore, if
there is bias or unfairness in this first step, all the processing
steps that follow may be compromised. Errors in automatic face
detection may be harmful to people as, for instance, in situations
where a decision may limit or restrict their freedom to come and
go. Therefore, it is crucial to investigate the existence of these
errors caused due to bias or unfairness. In this paper, an
analysis of five well-known top accuracy face detectors is
performed to investigate the presence of bias and unfairness in
their results. Some of the metrics used to identify the existence
of bias and unfairness involved the verification of demographic
parity, verification of existence of false positives and/or false
negatives, rate of positive prediction, and verification of
equalized odds. Data from about 365 different individuals were
randomly selected from the Facebook Casual Conversations Dataset,
resulting in approximately 5,500 videos, providing 550,000 frames
used for face detection in the performed experiments. The obtained
results show that all five face detectors presented a high risk of
not detecting faces from the female gender and from people between
46 and 85 years old. Furthermore, the skin tone groups related
with dark skin are the groups pointed out with highest risk of
faces not being detected for four of the five evaluated face
detectors. This paper points out the necessity of the research
community to engage in breaking the perpetuation of injustice that
may be present in datasets or machine learning models.",
conference-location = "Gramado, RS, Brazil (virtual)",
conference-year = "18-22 Oct. 2021",
doi = "10.1109/SIBGRAPI54419.2021.00041",
url = "http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/SIBGRAPI54419.2021.00041",
language = "en",
ibi = "8JMKD3MGPEW34M/45CKFQB",
url = "http://urlib.net/ibi/8JMKD3MGPEW34M/45CKFQB",
targetfile = "103.pdf",
urlaccessdate = "2024, May 07"
}