FB pixel

NIST goes deeper into bias in biometrics

 

biometric digital identity verification for fraud prevention

If NIST were a TV show, it would be Dragnet, the sober, just-the-facts U.S. detective show that saw crimes solved one understated observation, one calm inquiry at a time.

Case in point: NIST, the U.S. government’s chief biometric standards organization has published “A Proposal for Identifying and Managing Bias Within Artificial Intelligence.”

It is a modest proposal, indeed. Some on the industry’s periphery say bias needs to be ripped out root and stem, but the depth and breadth of inputs into AI make the task a significant challenge.

Instead, NIST researchers are looking first for a way to spot biometric bias and then manage it, both more achievable goals leading to a final reckoning.

They also have asked for public input into how to best evaluate trust in AI. And NIST continues to drill down into AI for trust metrics. It benchmarks facial recognition accuracy with its well-known (and to some, naturally, infamous) Face Recognition Vendor Test.

The agency’s new draft report advocates for a discussion among business owners, university researchers, law experts, sociologists — even marginalized populations likely to suffer under AI bias.

To start, NIST wants to move this community to find consensus standards and a risk-based framework that could result in “trustworthy and responsible AI.”

The scale of even NIST’s new proposal becomes clear when looking at how many fundamental concepts remain undefined. Indeed, agency researchers say the idea of mitigating risk in AI itself is a “still insufficiently defined building block creating trustworthiness.”

The researchers, working with the AI community, have found eight components of trustworthy artificial intelligence, each of which can be defined differently by different communities: accuracy, explainability and interpretability, privacy, reliability, robustness, safety and security.

It goes deeper, though. In announcing the draft, NIST pointed out that there are AI systems in the field written to model “criminality” or “employment suitability,” when neither concept can be credibly measured.

Instead, software developers substitute concrete but bias-filled metrics like where a person lives or how many years of school were completed by an applicant.

Comments are welcome through August 5.

Article Topics

 |   |   |   |   |   |   |   | 

Latest Biometrics News

 

Kenya raises issuance targets for digital IDs and passports

Everything being equal, Kenya plans to issue at least three million digital national IDs and one million biometric passports before…

 

IOM and Japan back biometrics at Sri Lanka ports of entry

Biometric technology use continues to grow at airports around the world. Air transport industry IT provider SITA predicts that by…

 

Kuwait fingerprints 2M as biometric data registration deadline nears

Kuwait is finalizing its program of collecting fingerprints for the country’s central biometric database as the June deadline for completion….

 

Xperix OCR software deployed for Brazil border control in deal with Akiyama Group

South Korea-based biometrics provider Xperix Inc. has announced the successful integration of its RealPass-N Optical Character Recognition (OCR) algorithm and…

 

The UK’s election may spell out the future of its national ID cards

Identity cards are back among the UK’s top controversial topics – thanks to the upcoming elections and its focus on…

 

Challenges in face biometrics addressed with new tech and research amid high stakes

Big biometrics contracts and deals were the theme of several of the stories on that drew the most interest from…

Comments

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Most Read From This Week

Featured Company

Biometrics Insight, Opinion

Digital ID In-Depth

Biometrics White Papers

Biometrics Events