À suivreGuide suivant
NYC Local Law 144 and AI Hiring Bias Audits
Société
GUIDE DE LA SOCIÉTÉ
Gender Shades and Facial Recognition Bias Audits
Gender Shades is a 2018 study by Joy Buolamwini and Timnit Gebru that audited commercial face analysis systems from IBM, Microsoft and Face++.
Sur cette page4 minutes de lecture
Aperçu
It found their gender classification was far less accurate for darker-skinned women than for lighter-skinned men. The study matters because it made intersectional auditing, which breaks results down by combined attributes rather than one at a time, a standard way of exposing hidden AI failures.
Plongée profonde
Joy Buolamwini, then at the MIT Media Lab, noticed that face detection software did not register her face until she put on a white mask. With Timnit Gebru, she designed a structured audit and published it at the 2018 Conference on Fairness, Accountability and Transparency. Existing benchmarks were dominated by lighter-skinned men, so they built their own, the Pilot Parliaments Benchmark. It contains 1,270 images of members of parliament from three African and three European countries, labeled by binary gender and by skin type on the dermatologists' Fitzpatrick scale. They tested the gender classification services of IBM, Microsoft and Face++. All three did better on men than on women and better on lighter skin than on darker skin. The worst results appeared where the two overlapped. Error rates for darker-skinned women reached about 35 percent for the worst system, compared with under 1 percent for lighter-skinned men. A single overall accuracy figure hid this gap. A 2019 follow-up by Inioluwa Deborah Raji and Buolamwini, "Actionable Auditing," found that the audited companies had narrowed their gaps after being publicly named. Vendors that had not been audited, including Amazon, showed similar disparities. Amazon disputed the methodology. A common misconception is that Gender Shades measured the face identification used by police. It measured gender classification. Evidence on identification came from NIST's 2019 demographic effects report, which tested around 200 algorithms. Many had higher false positive rates for some groups, including African and East Asian faces, often by large factors, while the most accurate algorithms showed much smaller differences. Real harm followed. Robert Williams, Nijeer Parks and Porcha Woodruff, all Black, were each wrongly arrested after facial recognition leads. In June 2020, IBM said it would leave the general-purpose facial recognition business, Amazon paused police use of Rekognition, and Microsoft said it would not sell to US police until a federal law was in place.
Impact stratégique
Risques et sécurité
Les dommages catastrophiques et quotidiens causés par l’IA dépendent tous deux de la personne qui comprend les risques et qui peut agir.
Décisions plus claires
Les connaissances du public et des professionnels déterminent si une politique de sécurité forte est politiquement possible.
Passer à travers le battage médiatique
Des explications claires réduisent la capture par le battage médiatique, les relations publiques en laboratoire et le théâtre d'éthique vague.
The Future of Gender Shades and Facial Recognition Bias Audits
Face recognition has become more accurate on average, and NIST's continuing tests show demographic differences shrinking for leading algorithms, though not disappearing, and staying large for many others. Policy remains fragmented. Some US cities restrict government use, the EU AI Act sharply limits real-time remote biometric identification in public spaces by police, and several vendors have withdrawn some products. Wrongful arrest cases continue to push police departments to treat matches as leads only. The Gender Shades method, publishing disaggregated results and naming vendors, is now widely used for auditing other AI systems, including language and image generators.
Mise en œuvre dans le monde réel
A product team reports face verification accuracy separately for darker-skinned women, darker-skinned men, lighter-skinned women and lighter-skinned men, instead of publishing one headline number that can hide a failing subgroup.
Robert Williams, a Black man in Detroit, was arrested in 2020 after facial recognition matched his driver's license photo to shoplifting footage. The charges were dropped, and a later settlement changed Detroit police rules on using such matches.
Before approving a vendor, a city procurement office checks NIST's demographic test results for the specific algorithm version on offer, because error differences vary widely between algorithms.
A researcher builds a test set balanced by skin type and gender, following the Pilot Parliaments Benchmark approach, to check a new face model for gaps before release.
Risques et garde-fous
Traiter le risque existentiel comme de la science-fiction alors que les capacités s’accroissent.
Confondre sécurité des produits de surface et alignement sous haute autonomie.
Laisser le public non anglophone et non expert avec uniquement des sources de mauvaise qualité.
Feuille de route de mise en œuvre
Séparez les dommages causés aux produits, leur mauvaise utilisation et les risques de perte de contrôle/désalignement.
Demandez quelles preuves pourraient changer votre point de vue sur les délais et la gravité.
Préférez les sources primaires et les évaluations concrètes aux allégations marketing.
Identifiez une voie d’action : carrière, politique, financement ou compétences – et pas seulement la sensibilisation.
Continuez à explorer
Free newsletter
Get the daily AI briefing
Three verified AI stories every weekday morning, written in plain English. Free forever, no ads.
One email each weekday. Unsubscribe in one click. We never sell or share your address.
Test yourself
Take the Gender Shades and Facial Recognition Bias Audits quiz
Instant feedback on every answer, and a shareable certificate with a verifiable ID once you pass a course.
Support free AI education. AI Understanding is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit — no ads, no paywall, ever. Make a donation
Questions fréquemment posées
What is Gender Shades and Facial Recognition Bias Audits?
Gender Shades is a 2018 study by Joy Buolamwini and Timnit Gebru that audited commercial face analysis systems from IBM, Microsoft and Face++. It found their gender classification was far less accurate for darker-skinned women than for lighter-skinned men. The study matters because it made intersectional auditing, which breaks results down by combined attributes rather than one at a time, a standard way of exposing hidden AI failures.
Which companies' face analysis services did the original Gender Shades study audit?
The 2018 study tested IBM, Microsoft and Face++. Amazon was examined in the 2019 follow-up.
What was the Pilot Parliaments Benchmark made of?
The benchmark used 1,270 images of parliamentarians from six countries, chosen to balance gender and skin type.
Which scale did the researchers use to label skin type?
They used the Fitzpatrick scale from dermatology. Some later work uses broader scales such as the Monk scale.
What task did Gender Shades actually measure?
The study measured gender classification. A common misconception is that it measured the identification systems used by police.
Which subgroup had the highest error rates in Gender Shades?
Errors peaked where the two attributes overlapped, at darker-skinned women, reaching about 35 percent for the worst system.
Continuez à apprendre
Guides associés
Plus de guides sélectionnés pour ce sujet