Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Survey of Social Bias in Vision-Language Models

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2309.14381 v1 pith:LJIKPHTN submitted 2023-09-24 cs.CL cs.AI

Survey of Social Bias in Vision-Language Models

classification cs.CL cs.AI
keywords modelssocialbiasbiasespre-trainedsurveyaimscommunity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

In recent years, the rapid advancement of machine learning (ML) models, particularly transformer-based pre-trained models, has revolutionized Natural Language Processing (NLP) and Computer Vision (CV) fields. However, researchers have discovered that these models can inadvertently capture and reinforce social biases present in their training datasets, leading to potential social harms, such as uneven resource allocation and unfair representation of specific social groups. Addressing these biases and ensuring fairness in artificial intelligence (AI) systems has become a critical concern in the ML community. The recent introduction of pre-trained vision-and-language (VL) models in the emerging multimodal field demands attention to the potential social biases present in these models as well. Although VL models are susceptible to social bias, there is a limited understanding compared to the extensive discussions on bias in NLP and CV. This survey aims to provide researchers with a high-level insight into the similarities and differences of social bias studies in pre-trained models across NLP, CV, and VL. By examining these perspectives, the survey aims to offer valuable guidelines on how to approach and mitigate social bias in both unimodal and multimodal settings. The findings and recommendations presented here can benefit the ML community, fostering the development of fairer and non-biased AI models in various applications and research endeavors.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. When Visual Evidence is Ambiguous: Pareidolia as a Diagnostic Probe for Vision Models

    cs.CV 2026-03 conditional novelty 6.0

    Vision-language models confidently misread face-like objects as people, while pure-vision classifiers stay diffuse and detectors suppress responses, showing uncertainty and bias are independent.

  2. On the Reproducibility of "FairCLIP: Harnessing Fairness in Vision-Language Learning''

    cs.CV 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0

    FairCLIP's claimed fairness and performance gains over CLIP do not reproduce on two datasets, and its official implementation diverges from the paper's own formulation.

  3. Vision-Language Models display a strong gender bias

    cs.CV 2025-08 reject novelty 3.0

    Using cosine similarity in CLIP embedding space, the paper finds that male and female face sets are differentially associated with occupation and activity statements across all four tested models.