Automated pain detection through machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) algorithms holds significant potential in healthcare, particularly for patients unable to self-report pain levels. However, the accuracy and fairness of these algorithms across different demographic groups (e.g., gender) remain under-researched. This paper investigates the gender fairness of ML and DL models trained on the UNBC-McMaster Shoulder Pain Expression Archive Database, evaluating the performance of various models in detecting pain based solely on the visual modality of participants’ facial expressions. We compare traditional ML algorithms, Linear Support Vector Machine (L SVM) and Radial Basis Function SVM (RBF SVM), with DL methods, Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) and Vision Transformer (ViT), using a range of performance and fairness metrics. While ViT achieved the highest accuracy and a selection of fairness metrics, all models exhibited gender-based biases. These findings highlight the persistent trade-off between accuracy and fairness, emphasising the need for fairness-aware techniques to mitigate biases in automated healthcare systems.

One of the primary goals of Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) research is to develop robots that can interpret human behavior and adapt their responses accordingly. Adaptive learning models, such as continual and reinforcement learning, play a crucial role in improving robots’ ability to interact effectively in real-world settings. However, these models face significant challenges due to the limited availability of real-world data, particularly in sensitive domains like healthcare and well-being. To address these challenges, causality provides a structured framework for understanding and modeling the underlying relationships between actions, events, and outcomes. By moving beyond mere pattern recognition, causality enables robots to make more explainable and generalizable decisions. This paper presents an exploratory causality-based analysis through a case study of an adaptive robotic coach delivering positive psychology exercises over four weeks in a workplace setting. The robotic coach autonomously adapts to multimodal human behaviors, such as facial valence and speech duration. By conducting both macro- and micro-level causal analyses, this study aims to gain deeper insights into how adaptability can enhance well-being during interactions. Ultimately, this research seeks to advance our understanding of how causality can help overcome challenges in HRI, particularly in real-world applications.

Unfair predictions of machine learning (ML) models impede their broad acceptance in real-world settings. Tackling this arduous challenge first necessitates defining what it means for an ML model to be fair. This has been addressed by the ML community with various measures of fairness that depend on the prediction outcomes of the ML models, either at the group-level or the individual-level. These fairness measures are limited in that they utilize point predictions, neglecting their variances, or uncertainties, making them susceptible to noise, missingness and shifts in data. In this paper, we first show that a ML model may appear to be fair with existing point-based fairness measures but biased against a demographic group in terms of prediction uncertainties. Then, we introduce new fairness measures based on different types of uncertainties, namely, aleatoric uncertainty and epistemic uncertainty. We demonstrate on many datasets that (i) our uncertaintybased measures are complementary to existing measures of fairness, and (ii) they provide more insights about the underlying issues leading to bias.

In recent years, the affective computing research community has put ethics at the centre of its research agenda. However, many of the currently available datasets for affective computing are ‘small’, making bias and debias analysis challenging. This paper presents the first work to explore bias analysis and mitigation of a small temporal multi-modal dataset for mental well-being by adopting different data augmentation techniques. This proof-of-concept work’s contributions include: i) introducing a novel small temporal multi-modal dataset of dyadic interactions during mental well-being coaching; ii) providing multi-modal and feature importance analyses evaluated via modelling performance and fairness metrics across both high and low-level features; and iii) proposing a simple and effective data augmentation strategy (MixFeat) to debias the small dataset presented in this paper. We conduct extensive experiments and analyses to compare our proposed method against other baseline data augmentation method across various uni-modal and multi-modal setups. Our results indicate that, regardless of the dimensionality of the dataset at hand, the inclusion of a bias analysis section in the conference papers is viable. This paper is therefore a call to the community to include a bias analysis section in ACII conference submissions, similar to the ablation studies conducted in papers submitted to major machine learning conferences.

Mental health is becoming an increasingly prominent health challenge. Despite a plethora of studies analysing and mitigating bias for a variety of tasks such as face recognition and credit scoring, research on machine learning (ML) fairness for mental health has been sparse to date. In this work, we focus on gender bias in mental health and make the following contributions. First, we examine whether bias exists in existing mental health datasets and algorithms. Our experiments were conducted using Depresjon, Psykose and D-Vlog. We identify that both data and algorithmic bias exist. Second, we analyse strategies that can be deployed at the pre-processing, in-processing and post-processing stages to mitigate for bias and evaluate their effectiveness. Third, we investigate factors that impact the efficacy of existing bias mitigation strategies and outline recommendations to achieve greater gender fairness for mental health. Upon obtaining counter-intuitive results on D-Vlog dataset, we undertake further experiments and analyses, and provide practical suggestions to avoid hampering bias mitigation efforts in ML for mental health.