FairLens is a benchmark and evaluation framework that measures fairness and validity of vision‑language models (VLMs) in high‑stakes domains such as hiring, legal, and healthcare. It uses over 100,000 face‑image and question pairs covering gender, race, and age, and assesses responses through demographic parity, soundness, demographic association, and bias in free‑text generation. The study finds that VLMs often make unwarranted inferences from faces rather than abstaining, especially in legal and healthcare contexts, and that small parity gaps can still hide unsafe treatment across groups.
By Vahid Reza Khazaie, Ahmed Y. Radwan, Shaina Raza
arXiv:2607. 16253v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Machine learning-based Type 2 diabetes risk prediction models obtain good internal validation results but lose effectiveness in real-world applications due to deficient external testing and fairness assessment.
By Rajveer Singh Pall, Sameer Yadav, Siddharth Bhalerao, Sourabh Sahu, Ritu Ahluwalia, Bhaskar Awadhiya
arXiv:2607. 08953v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Algorithmic fairness methods are increasingly used to identify and mitigate bias in machine learning models, yet most approaches are evaluated in isolation and along single demographic axes.
By Nick Souligne, Isabella Mixton-Garcia, Vignesh Subbian
arXiv:2607. 21300v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Machine unlearning has emerged as a tool for removing personal data from trained models to comply with recent AI regulations.
By Lorenzo Orsingher, Thomas De Min, Massimiliano Mancini, Davide Talon, Elisa Ricci
arXiv:2512.19735v4 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: Accurately predicting mortality risk in intensive care unit (ICU) patients is critical for clinical decision-making. Large language models (LLMs) a...
By Gangxiong Zhang, Yongchao Long, Yuxi Zhou, Yong Zhang, Shenda Hong
The paper investigates intersectional biases in multimodal clinical predictions using Electronic Healthcare Records (EHR). It introduces datasets MIMIC-Eye1 and MIMIC-IV ED, applies unified text representations from pre‑trained clinical language models, and benchmarks bias mitigation at the intersectional subgroup level. Results show that subgroup‑specific mitigation is robust across datasets, subgroups, and embeddings, effectively addressing intersectional biases in multimodal settings.
By Ayaazuddin Mohammad, Kishore Sampath, Resmi Ramachandranpillai
FairGlucose is a 300‑patient CGM cohort balanced across 12 demographic strata, providing 132,480 forecasting samples and 3,945 behavioral events. Benchmarking 33 models on 2‑hour glucose forecasting revealed that population‑level validation masks significant subgroup disparities, with error ratios ranging from 0.8 to 1.4 and T1D patients experiencing 6 mg/dL higher error than T2D. The study shows that these gaps persist across all models, align with clinically hard cases, and vary with input‑length sensitivity, underscoring the need for subgroup‑disaggregated reporting in digital health AI.
By Junjie Luo, Xuzhe Zhi, Rui Han, Abhimanyu Kumbara, Anand K. Iyer, Mansur E. Shomali, Ritu Agarwal, Guodong Gordon Gao
Algorithmic fairness methods are increasingly used to identify and mitigate bias in machine learning models, yet most approaches are evaluated in isolation and along single demographic axes. This limits practical guidance for selecting fairness strategies, where disparities may arise across intersectional subgroups and across multiple stages of the modeling lifecycle.
The paper examines how fairness conclusions in ICU mortality prediction using MIMIC-IV depend on the choice of metrics and the granularity of demographic analysis. It compares predictive-utility and subgroup-error metrics across various fairness interventions and introduces a lightweight adaptation strategy that balances ethnicity, gender, and insurance representation without conditioning on mortality outcomes. The study finds that different interventions can be evaluated differently across accuracy, sensitivity, and false-positive rate, and that marginal demographic summaries may hide heterogeneous error patterns within intersectional subgroups.
By Abdullah Al Noman, Fahmid Al Rifat, Tahrima Hashem, Syed Muhammad Ibne Zulfiker, Rishov Paul, Tanzima HAshem
arXiv:2603. 28387v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Trustworthy clinical AI requires that performance gains reflect genuine evidence integration rather than surface-level artifacts.
By Doan Nam Long Vu, Simone Balloccu
arXiv:2606. 04971v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Machine learning engineering (MLE) agents promise to automate end-to-end ML pipeline development from raw data and natural language instructions, potentially making ML accessible to non-technical domain experts.
By Anna Richter, Julia Stoyanovich, Sebastian Schelter
The paper introduces FRAME, a two‑step framework for auditing fairness claims in medical imaging. First, it derives a fair‑model reference distribution that captures the portion of subgroup performance differences attributable to sampling variation. Second, it tests the remaining difference using operators in representation space to assess whether demographic information or disease entanglement drives the bias. Across a large dataset of 702,206 images and 36 encoders, the reference explains a substantial median share of race and age differences, while interventions such as injecting demographic decodability or entangling disease direction have limited impact on the residual bias.
By Mahshad Lotfinia, Daniel Truhn, Andreas Maier, Soroosh Tayebi Arasteh