Differential Bias: On the Perceptibility of Stance Imbalance in Argumentation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2210.06970v1
• Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2022 12:48:07 GMT
• Title: Differential Bias: On the Perceptibility of Stance Imbalance in Argumentation
• Authors: Alonso Palomino, Martin Potthast, Khalid Al-Khatib and Benno Stein
• Abstract summary: We ask whether an "absolute bias classification" is a promising goal at all. To decide whether a text has crossed the proverbial line between non-biased and biased is subjective. A prerequisite for this kind of bias model is the ability of humans to perceive relative bias differences in the first place.
• Score: 35.2494622378896
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Most research on natural language processing treats bias as an absolute concept: Based on a (probably complex) algorithmic analysis, a sentence, an article, or a text is classified as biased or not. Given the fact that for humans the question of whether a text is biased can be difficult to answer or is answered contradictory, we ask whether an "absolute bias classification" is a promising goal at all. We see the problem not in the complexity of interpreting language phenomena but in the diversity of sociocultural backgrounds of the readers, which cannot be handled uniformly: To decide whether a text has crossed the proverbial line between non-biased and biased is subjective. By asking "Is text X more [less, equally] biased than text Y?" we propose to analyze a simpler problem, which, by its construction, is rather independent of standpoints, views, or sociocultural aspects. In such a model, bias becomes a preference relation that induces a partial ordering from least biased to most biased texts without requiring a decision on where to draw the line. A prerequisite for this kind of bias model is the ability of humans to perceive relative bias differences in the first place. In our research, we selected a specific type of bias in argumentation, the stance bias, and designed a crowdsourcing study showing that differences in stance bias are perceptible when (light) support is provided through training or visual aid.

Related papers

• Eliminating the Language Bias for Visual Question Answering with fine-grained Causal Intervention [9.859335795616028]
  We propose a novel causal intervention training scheme named CIBi to eliminate language bias from a finer-grained perspective. We employ causal intervention and contrastive learning to eliminate context bias and improve the multi-modal representation. We design a new question-only branch based on counterfactual generation to distill and eliminate keyword bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-14T06:09:16Z)
• Semantic Properties of cosine based bias scores for word embeddings [48.0753688775574]
  We propose requirements for bias scores to be considered meaningful for quantifying biases. We analyze cosine based scores from the literature with regard to these requirements. We underline these findings with experiments to show that the bias scores' limitations have an impact in the application case.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-27T20:31:10Z)
• Mitigating Bias for Question Answering Models by Tracking Bias Influence [84.66462028537475]
  We propose BMBI, an approach to mitigate the bias of multiple-choice QA models. Based on the intuition that a model would lean to be more biased if it learns from a biased example, we measure the bias level of a query instance. We show that our method could be applied to multiple QA formulations across multiple bias categories.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-13T00:49:09Z)
• It's All Relative: Interpretable Models for Scoring Bias in Documents [10.678219157857946]
  We propose an interpretable model to score the bias present in web documents, based only on their textual content. Our model incorporates assumptions reminiscent of the Bradley-Terry axioms and is trained on pairs of revisions of the same Wikipedia article. We show that we can interpret the parameters of the trained model to discover the words most indicative of bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-16T19:35:38Z)
• Causal foundations of bias, disparity and fairness [0.0]
  We propose to define bias as a direct causal effect that is unjustified. We propose to define disparity as a direct or indirect causal effect that includes a bias. Our proposed definitions can be used to study biases and disparities in a more rigorous and systematic way.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-27T17:33:04Z)
• The SAME score: Improved cosine based bias score for word embeddings [49.75878234192369]
  We introduce SAME, a novel bias score for semantic bias in embeddings. We show that SAME is capable of measuring semantic bias and identify potential causes for social bias in downstream tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-28T09:28:13Z)
• The Authors Matter: Understanding and Mitigating Implicit Bias in Deep Text Classification [36.361778457307636]
  Deep text classification models can produce biased outcomes for texts written by authors of certain demographic groups. In this paper, we first demonstrate that implicit bias exists in different text classification tasks for different demographic groups. We then build a learning-based interpretation method to deepen our knowledge of implicit bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-06T16:17:38Z)
• UnQovering Stereotyping Biases via Underspecified Questions [68.81749777034409]
  We present UNQOVER, a framework to probe and quantify biases through underspecified questions. We show that a naive use of model scores can lead to incorrect bias estimates due to two forms of reasoning errors. We use this metric to analyze four important classes of stereotypes: gender, nationality, ethnicity, and religion.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-06T01:49:52Z)
• Towards Controllable Biases in Language Generation [87.89632038677912]
  We develop a method to induce societal biases in generated text when input prompts contain mentions of specific demographic groups. We analyze two scenarios: 1) inducing negative biases for one demographic and positive biases for another demographic, and 2) equalizing biases between demographics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-01T08:25:11Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.