Skip to content
OpenTrain AIFor AI Companies

ContextBias: Controlled Evaluation of Bias Persistence Under Context Shift in Text-to-Image Models

Shaghayegh Kolli, Sina Emami, Moreno D'Incà, Pouyan Nejadi, Nicu Sebe +2 morePublished Aug 30, 2026
arXiv PDF
Researcher verdict
Context only
Use as context only
Benchmark evidence
Thin evidence
Verify before relying
Time to first repro
A few days
Plan setup time
Risk flags
2
Review before use

Abstract

Domain fit: AI-adjacent

Text-to-image models learn associations between concepts - in the case of this paper, people's professions, which we refer to as roles - and visual attributes. These associations can underpin many observed forms of stereotypical bias. A key open question in this area is whether these associations are stable or change when visual representations of people in professional roles are placed in different prompted contexts. We introduce ContextBias, a controlled evaluation framework, and ContextBench, a benchmark spanning 92 roles and 1,656 semantically controlled prompts, designed to isolate the effect of contextual variation on role-linked visual representations. Evaluating four state-of-the-art models on 66,240 generated images, we find that placing a role in a semantically unrelated context does not suppress role-linked attributes; instead, cross-role attribute concentration increases (pooled BI $+0.047$). Demographic cues, characteristic garments, and role-specific tools remain highly prevalent across context-free, related, and unrelated conditions, and are robust to semantic prompt reformulation. Scene composition and camera framing show the greatest context-sensitivity. These findings reveal a form of stereotypical persistence that remains largely invisible to context-free evaluations, highlighting the need for controlled contextual variation in bias benchmarking. Code and dataset: https://huggingface.co/datasets/shaghayegh/ContextBias , https://github.com/Sina-Emami/ContextBias

Results and benchmarks

Text-to-image models learn associations between concepts - in the case of this paper, people's professions, which we refer to as roles - and visual attributes.
Task Dataset Metric Value Source
Computer vision SD 3.5 Accuracy 90.3 paper-derived
Computer vision SDXL Accuracy 92.1 paper-derived
Computer vision FLUX.1 Accuracy 86.4 paper-derived

Audit each benchmark finding before selecting an implementation path. Evidence refs map to the disclosure below.

Implementation

No direct implementation yet

Maintained implementation evidence is not confirmed for this paper yet.

Use the implementation status and reproduction sections for the current action plan.

Implementation evidence summary
Confidence: low

No direct maintained repository implementation was found, but paper-linked Hugging Face artifacts are available.

Reproduction risks
  • Estimate assumes artifact-level reproduction; full training reproduction may require additional paper details.

Reproduction readiness

Time to first repro: days
Last checked: Sep 1, 2026

No repo

No verified implementation available

  • No maintained repository has been identified for this paper. Check adjacent implementations or HF artifacts below.

Hardware requirements

  • Expect multi-day setup/compute for meaningful reproduction based on current guidance.

Repositories and ecosystem

No additional verified repositories beyond the primary recommendation.

Hugging Face artifacts

Models

No trustworthy models matches right now.

Search models on Hugging Face

Spaces

No trustworthy spaces matches right now.

Search spaces on Hugging Face

Research context

Tasks

Computer vision

Methods

None detected

Domains

Computer vision

Evaluation and human feedback data

Open this paper in HFEPX to review benchmark signals, evaluation modes, and human-feedback protocol context.

Open in HFEPX
Explore similar papers

Jump to Paper2Code search queries derived from this paper's research context.