Adding guardrails to advanced chatbots
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2306.07500v1
- Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2023 02:23:04 GMT
- Title: Adding guardrails to advanced chatbots
- Authors: Yanchen Wang, Lisa Singh
- Abstract summary: Launch of ChatGPT in November 2022 has ushered in a new era of AI.
There are already concerns that humans may be replaced by chatbots for a variety of jobs.
These biases may cause significant harm and/or inequity toward different subpopulations.
- Score: 5.203329540700177
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: Generative AI models continue to become more powerful. The launch of ChatGPT
in November 2022 has ushered in a new era of AI. ChatGPT and other similar
chatbots have a range of capabilities, from answering student homework
questions to creating music and art. There are already concerns that humans may
be replaced by chatbots for a variety of jobs. Because of the wide spectrum of
data chatbots are built on, we know that they will have human errors and human
biases built into them. These biases may cause significant harm and/or inequity
toward different subpopulations. To understand the strengths and weakness of
chatbot responses, we present a position paper that explores different use
cases of ChatGPT to determine the types of questions that are answered fairly
and the types that still need improvement. We find that ChatGPT is a fair
search engine for the tasks we tested; however, it has biases on both text
generation and code generation. We find that ChatGPT is very sensitive to
changes in the prompt, where small changes lead to different levels of
fairness. This suggests that we need to immediately implement "corrections" or
mitigation strategies in order to improve fairness of these systems. We suggest
different strategies to improve chatbots and also advocate for an impartial
review panel that has access to the model parameters to measure the levels of
different types of biases and then recommends safeguards that move toward
responses that are less discriminatory and more accurate.
Related papers
- First-Person Fairness in Chatbots [13.787745105316043]
We study "first-person fairness," which means fairness toward the user.
This includes providing high-quality responses to all users regardless of their identity or background.
We propose a scalable, privacy-preserving method for evaluating one aspect of first-person fairness.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-16T17:59:47Z) - In Generative AI we Trust: Can Chatbots Effectively Verify Political
Information? [39.58317527488534]
This article presents a comparative analysis of the ability of two large language model (LLM)-based chatbots, ChatGPT and Bing Chat, to detect veracity of political information.
We use AI auditing methodology to investigate how chatbots evaluate true, false, and borderline statements on five topics: COVID-19, Russian aggression against Ukraine, the Holocaust, climate change, and LGBTQ+ related debates.
The results show high performance of ChatGPT for the baseline veracity evaluation task, with 72 percent of the cases evaluated correctly on average across languages without pre-training.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-12-20T15:17:03Z) - Primacy Effect of ChatGPT [69.49920102917598]
We study the primacy effect of ChatGPT: the tendency of selecting the labels at earlier positions as the answer.
We hope that our experiments and analyses provide additional insights into building more reliable ChatGPT-based solutions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-20T00:37:28Z) - Bias and Fairness in Chatbots: An Overview [38.21995125571103]
Modern chatbots are more powerful and have been used in real-world applications.
Due to the huge amounts of training data, extremely large model sizes, and lack of interpretability, bias mitigation and fairness preservation are challenging.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-09-16T02:01:18Z) - Chatbots put to the test in math and logic problems: A preliminary
comparison and assessment of ChatGPT-3.5, ChatGPT-4, and Google Bard [68.8204255655161]
We use 30 questions that are clear, without any ambiguities, fully described with plain text only, and have a unique, well defined correct answer.
The answers are recorded and discussed, highlighting their strengths and weaknesses.
It was found that ChatGPT-4 outperforms ChatGPT-3.5 in both sets of questions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-05-30T11:18:05Z) - To ChatGPT, or not to ChatGPT: That is the question! [78.407861566006]
This study provides a comprehensive and contemporary assessment of the most recent techniques in ChatGPT detection.
We have curated a benchmark dataset consisting of prompts from ChatGPT and humans, including diverse questions from medical, open Q&A, and finance domains.
Our evaluation results demonstrate that none of the existing methods can effectively detect ChatGPT-generated content.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-04-04T03:04:28Z) - Let's have a chat! A Conversation with ChatGPT: Technology,
Applications, and Limitations [0.0]
Chat Generative Pre-trained Transformer, better known as ChatGPT, can generate human-like sentences and write coherent essays.
Potential applications of ChatGPT in various domains, including healthcare, education, and research, are highlighted.
Despite promising results, there are several privacy and ethical concerns surrounding ChatGPT.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-02-27T14:26:29Z) - Is ChatGPT a General-Purpose Natural Language Processing Task Solver? [113.22611481694825]
Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated the ability to perform a variety of natural language processing (NLP) tasks zero-shot.
Recently, the debut of ChatGPT has drawn a great deal of attention from the natural language processing (NLP) community.
It is not yet known whether ChatGPT can serve as a generalist model that can perform many NLP tasks zero-shot.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-02-08T09:44:51Z) - A Categorical Archive of ChatGPT Failures [47.64219291655723]
ChatGPT, developed by OpenAI, has been trained using massive amounts of data and simulates human conversation.
It has garnered significant attention due to its ability to effectively answer a broad range of human inquiries.
However, a comprehensive analysis of ChatGPT's failures is lacking, which is the focus of this study.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-02-06T04:21:59Z) - Put Chatbot into Its Interlocutor's Shoes: New Framework to Learn
Chatbot Responding with Intention [55.77218465471519]
This paper proposes an innovative framework to train chatbots to possess human-like intentions.
Our framework included a guiding robot and an interlocutor model that plays the role of humans.
We examined our framework using three experimental setups and evaluate the guiding robot with four different metrics to demonstrated flexibility and performance advantages.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-03-30T15:24:37Z)
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.