Undesirable Biases in NLP: Addressing Challenges of Measurement

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2211.13709v4
• Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2024 11:38:28 GMT
• Title: Undesirable Biases in NLP: Addressing Challenges of Measurement
• Authors: Oskar van der Wal, Dominik Bachmann, Alina Leidinger, Leendert van Maanen, Willem Zuidema, Katrin Schulz
• Abstract summary: We provide an interdisciplinary approach to discussing the issue of NLP model bias by adopting the lens of psychometrics. We will explore two central notions from psychometrics, the construct validity and the reliability of measurement tools. Our goal is to provide NLP practitioners with methodological tools for designing better bias measures.
• Score: 1.7126708168238125
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: As Large Language Models and Natural Language Processing (NLP) technology rapidly develop and spread into daily life, it becomes crucial to anticipate how their use could harm people. One problem that has received a lot of attention in recent years is that this technology has displayed harmful biases, from generating derogatory stereotypes to producing disparate outcomes for different social groups. Although a lot of effort has been invested in assessing and mitigating these biases, our methods of measuring the biases of NLP models have serious problems and it is often unclear what they actually measure. In this paper, we provide an interdisciplinary approach to discussing the issue of NLP model bias by adopting the lens of psychometrics -- a field specialized in the measurement of concepts like bias that are not directly observable. In particular, we will explore two central notions from psychometrics, the construct validity and the reliability of measurement tools, and discuss how they can be applied in the context of measuring model bias. Our goal is to provide NLP practitioners with methodological tools for designing better bias measures, and to inspire them more generally to explore tools from psychometrics when working on bias measurement tools.

Related papers

• Fast Model Debias with Machine Unlearning [54.32026474971696]
  Deep neural networks might behave in a biased manner in many real-world scenarios. Existing debiasing methods suffer from high costs in bias labeling or model re-training. We propose a fast model debiasing framework (FMD) which offers an efficient approach to identify, evaluate and remove biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-19T08:10:57Z)
• Bias and Fairness in Large Language Models: A Survey [73.87651986156006]
  We present a comprehensive survey of bias evaluation and mitigation techniques for large language models (LLMs) We first consolidate, formalize, and expand notions of social bias and fairness in natural language processing. We then unify the literature by proposing three intuitive, two for bias evaluation, and one for mitigation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-02T00:32:55Z)
• This Prompt is Measuring <MASK>: Evaluating Bias Evaluation in Language Models [12.214260053244871]
  We analyse the body of work that uses prompts and templates to assess bias in language models. We draw on a measurement modelling framework to create a taxonomy of attributes that capture what a bias test aims to measure. Our analysis illuminates the scope of possible bias types the field is able to measure, and reveals types that are as yet under-researched.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-22T06:28:48Z)
• Fair Enough: Standardizing Evaluation and Model Selection for Fairness Research in NLP [64.45845091719002]
  Modern NLP systems exhibit a range of biases, which a growing literature on model debiasing attempts to correct. This paper seeks to clarify the current situation and plot a course for meaningful progress in fair learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-11T14:54:00Z)
• A Survey of Methods for Addressing Class Imbalance in Deep-Learning Based Natural Language Processing [68.37496795076203]
  We provide guidance for NLP researchers and practitioners dealing with imbalanced data. We first discuss various types of controlled and real-world class imbalance. We organize the methods by whether they are based on sampling, data augmentation, choice of loss function, staged learning, or model design.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-10T13:26:40Z)
• Towards an Enhanced Understanding of Bias in Pre-trained Neural Language Models: A Survey with Special Emphasis on Affective Bias [2.6304695993930594]
  We present a survey to comprehend bias in large pre-trained language models, analyze the stages at which they occur, and various ways in which these biases could be quantified and mitigated. Considering wide applicability of textual affective computing based downstream tasks in real-world systems such as business, healthcare, education, etc., we give a special emphasis on investigating bias in the context of affect (emotion) i.e., Affective Bias. We present a summary of various bias evaluation corpora that help to aid future research and discuss challenges in the research on bias in pre-trained language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-21T18:51:19Z)
• A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Natural Language Processing [1.713291434132985]
  We analyze the origins of biases, the definitions of fairness, and how different subfields of NLP bias can be mitigated. We discuss how future studies can work towards eradicating pernicious biases from NLP algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-06T18:12:30Z)
• Information-Theoretic Bias Reduction via Causal View of Spurious Correlation [71.9123886505321]
  We propose an information-theoretic bias measurement technique through a causal interpretation of spurious correlation. We present a novel debiasing framework against the algorithmic bias, which incorporates a bias regularization loss. The proposed bias measurement and debiasing approaches are validated in diverse realistic scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-01-10T01:19:31Z)
• What do Bias Measures Measure? [41.36968251743058]
  Natural Language Processing models propagate social biases about protected attributes such as gender, race, and nationality. To create interventions and mitigate these biases and associated harms, it is vital to be able to detect and measure such biases. This work presents a comprehensive survey of existing bias measures in NLP as a function of the associated NLP tasks, metrics, datasets, and social biases and corresponding harms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-08-07T04:08:47Z)
• Towards Understanding and Mitigating Social Biases in Language Models [107.82654101403264]
  Large-scale pretrained language models (LMs) can be potentially dangerous in manifesting undesirable representational biases. We propose steps towards mitigating social biases during text generation. Our empirical results and human evaluation demonstrate effectiveness in mitigating bias while retaining crucial contextual information.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-24T17:52:43Z)
• Intrinsic Bias Metrics Do Not Correlate with Application Bias [12.588713044749179]
  This research examines whether easy-to-measure intrinsic metrics correlate well to real world extrinsic metrics. We measure both intrinsic and extrinsic bias across hundreds of trained models covering different tasks and experimental conditions. We advise that efforts to debias embedding spaces be always also paired with measurement of downstream model bias, and suggest that that community increase effort into making downstream measurement more feasible via creation of additional challenge sets and annotated test data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-31T18:59:44Z)

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.