Bias in Gender Bias Benchmarks: How Spurious Features Distort Evaluation
Yusuke Hirota, Ryo Hachiuma, Boyi Li, Ximing Lu, Michael Ross Boone, Boris Ivanovic, Yejin Choi, Marco Pavone, Yu-Chiang Frank Wang, Noa Garcia, Yuta Nakashima, Chao-Han Huck Yang
Abstract
Gender bias in vision-language foundation models (VLMs) raises concerns about their safe deployment and is typically evaluated using benchmarks with gender annotations on real-world images. However, as these benchmarks often contain spurious correlations between gender and non-gender features, such as objects and backgrounds, we identify a critical oversight in gender bias evaluation: Do spurious features distort gender bias evaluation? To address this question, we systematically perturb non-gender features across four widely used benchmarks (COCO-gender, FACET, MIAP, and PHASE) and various VLMs to quantify their impact on bias evaluation. Our findings reveal that even minimal perturbations, such as masking just 10% of objects or weakly blurring backgrounds, can dramatically alter bias scores, shifting metrics by up to 175% in generative VLMs and 43% in CLIP variants. This suggests that current bias evaluations often reflect model responses to spurious features rather than gender bias, undermining their reliability. Since creating spurious feature-free benchmarks is fundamentally challenging, we recommend reporting bias metrics alongside feature-sensitivity measurements to enable a more reliable bias assessment.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext c86e8fa7-0646-4651-9d5e-fffb2f080109Builds on27
- Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language SupervisionAlec Radford, Jong Wook Kim, Chris Hallacy, Aditya Ramesh et al.ICML 2021 · 47,906 citations
- High-Resolution Image Synthesis with Latent Diffusion ModelsRobin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Dominik Lorenz, Patrick Esser et al.CVPR 2022 · 13,123 citations
- A ConvNet for the 2020sZhuang Liu, Hanzi Mao, Chao-Yuan Wu, Christoph Feichtenhofer et al.CVPR 2022 · 6,782 citations
- Sigmoid Loss for Language Image Pre-TrainingXiaohua Zhai, Basil Mustafa, Alexander Kolesnikov, Lucas BeyerICCV 2023 · 2,932 citations
- Balanced Datasets Are Not Enough: Estimating and Mitigating Gender Bias in Deep Image RepresentationsTianlu Wang, Jieyu Zhao, Mark Yatskar, Kai-Wei Chang et al.ICCV 2019 · 469 citations
Related papers
- A Sober Look at the Robustness of CLIPs to Spurious FeaturesQizhou Wang, Yong Lin, Yongqiang Chen, Ludwig Schmidt et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 46 citations
- Gender Artifacts in Visual DatasetsNicole Meister, Dora Zhao, Angelina Wang, Vikram V. Ramaswamy et al.ICCV 2023 · 37 citations
- Concept Regions Matter: Benchmarking CLIP with a New Cluster-Importance ApproachAishwarya Agarwal, Srikrishna Karanam, Vineet GandhiCVPR 2026 · 2 citations
- Causal-HalBench: Uncovering LVLMs Object Hallucinations Through Causal InterventionZhe Xu, Zhicai Wang, Junkang Wu, Jinda Lu et al.AAAI 2026
- FACET: Fairness in Computer Vision Evaluation BenchmarkLaura Gustafson, Chloé Rolland, Nikhila Ravi, Quentin Duval et al.ICCV 2023 · 74 citations
