Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher.
Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?
Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.
Contrastive learning is a self-supervised representation learning method that achieves milestone performance in various classification tasks. However, due to its unsupervised fashion, it suffers from the false negative sample problem: randomly drawn negative samples that are assumed to have a different label but actually have the same label as the anchor. This deteriorates the performance of contrastive learning as it contradicts the motivation of contrasting semantically similar and dissimilar pairs. This raised the attention and the importance of finding legitimate negative samples, which should be addressed by distinguishing between 1) true vs. false negatives; 2) easy vs. hard negatives. However, previous works were limited to the statistical approach to handle false negative and hard negative samples with hyperparameters tuning. In this paper, we go beyond the statistical approach and explore the connection between hard negative samples and data bias. We introduce a novel debiased contrastive learning method to explore hard negatives by relative difficulty referencing the bias-amplifying counterpart. We propose triplet loss for training a biased encoder that focuses more on easy negative samples. We theoretically show that the triplet loss amplifies the bias in self-supervised representation learning. Finally, we empirically show the proposed method improves downstream classification performance.more » « lessFree, publicly-accessible full text available June 1, 2024
Numerous methods have been developed to explain the inner mechanism of deep neural network (DNN) based classifiers. Existing explanation methods are often limited to explaining predictions of a pre-specified class, which answers the question “why is the input classified into this class?” However, such explanations with respect to a single class are inherently insufficient because they do not capture features with class-discriminative power. That is, features that are important for predicting one class may also be important for other classes. To capture features with true class-discriminative power, we should instead ask “why is the input classified into this class, but not others?” To answer this question, we propose a weighted contrastive framework for explaining DNNs. Our framework can easily convert any existing back-propagation explanation methods to build class-contrastive explanations. We theoretically validate our weighted contrast explanation in general back-propagation explanations, and show that our framework enables class-contrastive explanations with significant improvements in both qualitative and quantitative experiments. Based on the results, we point out an important blind spot in the current explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) study, where explanations towards the predicted logits and the probabilities are obfuscated. We suggest that these two aspects should be distinguished explicitly any time explanation methods are applied.more » « less
Fairness has become an important topic in machine learning. Generally, most literature on fairness assumes that the sensitive information, such as gender or race, is present in the training set, and uses this information to mitigate bias. However, due to practical concerns like privacy and regulation, applications of these methods are restricted. Also, although much of the literature studies supervised learning, in many real-world scenarios, we want to utilize the large unlabelled dataset to improve the model's accuracy. Can we improve fair classification without sensitive information and without labels? To tackle the problem, in this paper, we propose a novel reweighing-based contrastive learning method. The goal of our method is to learn a generally fair representation without observing sensitive attributes.Our method assigns weights to training samples per iteration based on their gradient directions relative to the validation samples such that the average top-k validation loss is minimized. Compared with past fairness methods without demographics, our method is built on fully unsupervised training data and requires only a small labelled validation set. We provide rigorous theoretical proof of the convergence of our model. Experimental results show that our proposed method achieves better or comparable performance than state-of-the-art methods on three datasets in terms of accuracy and several fairness metrics.more » « less
Most of existing work on fairness assumes available demographic information in the training set. In practice, due to legal or privacy concerns, when demographic information is not available in the training set, it is crucial to find alternative objectives to ensure fairness. Existing work on fairness without demographics follows Rawlsian Max-Min fairness objectives. However, such constraints could be too strict to improve group fairness, and could lead to a great decrease in accuracy. In light of these limitations, in this paper, we propose to solve the problem from a new perspective, i.e., through knowledge distillation. Our method uses soft label from an overfitted teacher model as an alternative, and we show from preliminary experiments that soft labelling is beneficial for improving fairness. We analyze theoretically the fairness of our method, and we show that our method can be treated as an error-based reweighing. Experimental results on three datasets show that our method outperforms state-of-the-art alternatives, with notable improvements in group fairness and with relatively small decrease in accuracy.more » « less