Skip to content
AI News HubLIVE
Original source2 min read

Do Counterfactually Fair Image Classifiers Satisfy Group Fairness? -- A Theoretical and Empirical Study

Summary

This study investigates the relationship between counterfactual fairness (CF) and group fairness (GF) in image classification. By constructing new datasets with high-quality image editing, it finds that CF does not imply GF in images, contrary to tabular data results. The discrepancy is attributed to a latent attribute correlated with the sensitive attribute. The proposed Counterfactual Knowledge Distillation (CKD) method reduces reliance on this attribute, allowing CF-achieving models to also satisfy GF.

SourcearXiv Computer VisionAuthor: Sangwon Jung, Sumin Yu, Sanghyuk Chun, Taesup Moon
Do Counterfactually Fair Image Classifiers Satisfy Group Fairness? -- A Theoretical and Empirical Study
Report an error

The correction channel is not available yet. You can copy the article reference below for later.

Correction instructions
Read article

[Submitted on 7 Jul 2026]

Title:Do Counterfactually Fair Image Classifiers Satisfy Group Fairness? -- A Theoretical and Empirical Study

View a PDF of the paper titled Do Counterfactually Fair Image Classifiers Satisfy Group Fairness? -- A Theoretical and Empirical Study, by Sangwon Jung and 3 other authors

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:The notion of algorithmic fairness has been actively explored from various aspects of fairness, such as counterfactual fairness (CF) and group fairness (GF). However, the exact relationship between CF and GF remains to be unclear, especially in image classification tasks; the reason is because we often cannot collect counterfactual samples regarding a sensitive attribute, essential for evaluating CF, from the existing images (\eg, a photo of the same person but with different secondary sex characteristics). In this paper, we construct new image datasets for evaluating CF by using a high-quality image editing method and carefully labeling with human annotators. Our datasets, \oursceleb and \ourslfw, build upon the popular image GF benchmarks; hence, we can evaluate CF and GF simultaneously. We empirically observe that CF does not imply GF in image classification, whereas previous studies on tabular datasets observed the opposite. We theoretically show that it could be due to the existence of a latent attribute $G$ that is correlated with, but not caused by, the sensitive attribute (\eg, secondary sex characteristics are highly correlated with hair length). From this observation, we propose a simple baseline, Counterfactual Knowledge Distillation (CKD), to mitigate such correlation with the sensitive attributes. Extensive experimental results on \oursceleb and \ourslfw demonstrate that CF-achieving models satisfy GF if we successfully reduce the reliance on $G$ (\eg, using CKD).

Comments: NeurIPS 2024 Track Datasets and Benchmarks

Subjects:

Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (cs.CV); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)

Cite as: arXiv:2607.06603 [cs.CV]

(or arXiv:2607.06603v1 [cs.CV] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2607.06603

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Sumin Yu [view email] [v1] Tue, 7 Jul 2026 01:48:59 UTC (1,259 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled Do Counterfactually Fair Image Classifiers Satisfy Group Fairness? -- A Theoretical and Empirical Study, by Sangwon Jung and 3 other authors

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Current browse context:

cs.CV

new | recent | 2026-07

Change to browse by:

cs cs.AI

References & Citations

NASA ADS

Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

Loading...

Data provided by:

Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)

Connected Papers Toggle

Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)

Litmaps Toggle

Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)

scite.ai Toggle

scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

Links to Code Toggle

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub Toggle

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

GotitPub Toggle

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Huggingface Toggle

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast Toggle

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle

Replicate (What is Replicate?)

Spaces Toggle

Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)

Spaces Toggle

TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

Core recommender toggle

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

Author

Venue

Institution

Topic

About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

Key points and analysis

Article intelligence

InvestorsAdvanced

Key points

  • New image datasets built on existing GF benchmarks enable simultaneous evaluation of CF and GF.
  • Empirical observation shows CF does not imply GF in image classification, unlike in tabular data.
  • Theoretical analysis identifies a latent attribute G correlated with the sensitive attribute as the cause.
  • CKD method effectively mitigates reliance on G, allowing CF models to achieve GF.

Highlights and analysis are generated automatically and may contain errors. Check the original source.