Papers › Benchmarking Bias Mitigation Toward Fairness Without Harm from Vision to LVLMs
Benchmarking Bias Mitigation Toward Fairness Without Harm from Vision to LVLMs
Xuwei Tan, Ziyu Hu, Xueru Zhang
Title, abstract, authors and date from arXiv's metadata (CC0); this paper is not in the Papers with Code archive (frozen 2025-07-28).
Machine learning models trained on real-world data often inherit and amplify biases against certain social groups, raising urgent concerns about their deployment at scale. While numerous bias mitigation methods have been proposed, comparing the effectiveness of bias mitigation methods remains difficult due to heterogeneous datasets, inconsistent fairness metrics, isolated evaluation of vision versus multi-modal models, and insufficient hyperparameter tuning that undermines fair comparisons. We introduce NH-Fair, a unified benchmark for fairness without harm that spans both vision models and large vision-language models (LVLMs) under standardized data, metrics, and training protocols, covering supervised and zero-shot regimes. Our key contributions are: (1) a systematic ERM tuning study that identifies training choices with large influence on both utility and disparities, yielding empirically grounded guidelines to help practitioners reduce expensive hyperparameter tuning space in achieving strong fairness and accuracy; (2) evidence that many debiasing methods do not reliably outperform a well-tuned ERM baseline, whereas a composite data-augmentation method consistently delivers parity gains without sacrificing utility, emerging as a promising practical strategy. (3) an analysis showing that while LVLMs achieve higher average accuracy, they still exhibit subgroup disparities, and gains from scaling are typically smaller than those from architectural or training-protocol choices. NH-Fair provides a reproducible, tuning-aware pipeline for rigorous, harm-aware fairness evaluation.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2602.03895")
Code
Syntology Ran 15 of 18 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 3 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 2 ran · honoured contract; 4 ran · our draft was wrong; 6 ran · fixture could not drive it; 3 ran with no contract checked.
By repository: found in paper text by Syntology: 18 samples from 1 repository, 15 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
18 samples harvested; 15 ran; 2 honoured the contract we drafted; 3 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 0 of the 18 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from osu-srml/NH-Fair. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
1894046f082c6404 · report
da92533d309552ce · report
9c7b964a709120c3 · report
a1d4f2e3c1809bc8 · report
d26ce6032a0e6929 · report
b3ee986ec34da06e · report
bc02bb45691ed73d · report
6565a2aa50bc9b79 · report
bd2ec691b7389cb0 · report
ebb68aecb84445c8 · report
0b6c7f6d4445fbc0 · report
64cb0653275cb696 · report
2035b91debc00b1b · report
b38e8ccac9611ccc · report
df47780ad317c5b1 · report
ec631ebe54a74135 · report
f06c29bc92441ccb · report
bd294a0dbfa9dae4 · report
Results from the paper
The Papers with Code archive ends with its 2025-07-28 snapshot. This paper's arXiv identifier, 2602.03895, was issued in February 2026, after that date, so the archive has no leaderboard rows for it.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections