Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

Small but Fair! Fairness for Multimodal Human-Human and Robot-Human Mental Wellbeing Coaching

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 2407.01562 v1 pith:BNA4KV4H submitted 2024-05-15 cs.RO

classification cs.RO
keywords fairnessbiasresearchsmallanalysisdatasetsmultimodalsettings
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

In recent years, the affective computing (AC) and human-robot interaction (HRI) research communities have put fairness at the centre of their research agenda. However, none of the existing work has addressed the problem of machine learning (ML) bias in HRI settings. In addition, many of the current datasets for AC and HRI are "small", making ML bias and debias analysis challenging. This paper presents the first work to explore ML bias analysis and mitigation of three small multimodal datasets collected within both a human-human and robot-human wellbeing coaching settings. The contributions of this work includes: i) being the first to explore the problem of ML bias and fairness within HRI settings; and ii) providing a multimodal analysis evaluated via modelling performance and fairness metrics across both high and low-level features and proposing a simple and effective data augmentation strategy (MixFeat) to debias the small datasets presented within this paper; and iii) conducting extensive experimentation and analyses to reveal ML fairness insights unique to AC and HRI research in order to distill a set of recommendations to aid AC and HRI researchers to be more engaged with fairness-aware ML-based research.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. Who Owns The Robot?: Four Ethical and Socio-technical Questions about Wellbeing Robots in the Real World through Community Engagement

    cs.CY 2025-09 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Community workshops with 22 participants yield four ethical questions (safety, beneficiaries, data ownership, necessity) as a reflective framework for wellbeing robot design.

  2. Gender Fairness of Machine Learning Algorithms for Pain Detection

    cs.CV 2025-06 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Across four classifiers trained on the UNBC shoulder-pain dataset, every model showed gender disparities in pain detection, with the Vision Transformer achieving the best accuracy and some fairness metrics but not all.

  3. Automatic Depression Assessment using Machine Learning: A Comprehensive Survey

    q-bio.NC 2025-06 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A comprehensive survey of machine learning approaches for automatic depression assessment from multimodal human behaviour and brain data, covering 183 papers and ten public datasets.

  4. FG 2025 TrustFAA: the First Workshop on Towards Trustworthy Facial Affect Analysis: Advancing Insights of Fairness, Explainability, and Safety (TrustFAA)

    cs.CV 2025-06 unverdicted

    TrustFAA is a proposed FG 2025 workshop on fairness, explainability, and safety in facial affect analysis; this arXiv posting is its program and call for papers, with no new research results.

Pith tools