Fairness of ChatGPT and the Role Of Explainable-Guided Prompts
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2307.11761v1
- Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2023 09:20:16 GMT
- Title: Fairness of ChatGPT and the Role Of Explainable-Guided Prompts
- Authors: Yashar Deldjoo
- Abstract summary: Our research investigates the potential of Large-scale Language Models (LLMs), specifically OpenAI's GPT, in credit risk assessment.
Our findings suggest that LLMs, when directed by judiciously designed prompts and supplemented with domain-specific knowledge, can parallel the performance of traditional Machine Learning (ML) models.
- Score: 6.079011829257036
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: Our research investigates the potential of Large-scale Language Models
(LLMs), specifically OpenAI's GPT, in credit risk assessment-a binary
classification task. Our findings suggest that LLMs, when directed by
judiciously designed prompts and supplemented with domain-specific knowledge,
can parallel the performance of traditional Machine Learning (ML) models.
Intriguingly, they achieve this with significantly less data-40 times less,
utilizing merely 20 data points compared to the ML's 800. LLMs particularly
excel in minimizing false positives and enhancing fairness, both being vital
aspects of risk analysis. While our results did not surpass those of classical
ML models, they underscore the potential of LLMs in analogous tasks, laying a
groundwork for future explorations into harnessing the capabilities of LLMs in
diverse ML tasks.
Related papers
- Large Language Models as Reliable Knowledge Bases? [60.25969380388974]
Large Language Models (LLMs) can be viewed as potential knowledge bases (KBs)
This study defines criteria that a reliable LLM-as-KB should meet, focusing on factuality and consistency.
strategies like ICL and fine-tuning are unsuccessful at making LLMs better KBs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-07-18T15:20:18Z) - Are Large Language Models Good Statisticians? [10.42853117200315]
StatQA is a new benchmark designed for statistical analysis tasks.
We show that even state-of-the-art models such as GPT-4o achieve a best performance of only 64.83%.
While open-source LLMs show limited capability, those fine-tuned ones exhibit marked improvements.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-06-12T02:23:51Z) - Towards Modeling Learner Performance with Large Language Models [7.002923425715133]
This paper investigates whether the pattern recognition and sequence modeling capabilities of LLMs can be extended to the domain of knowledge tracing.
We compare two approaches to using LLMs for this task, zero-shot prompting and model fine-tuning, with existing, non-LLM approaches to knowledge tracing.
While LLM-based approaches do not achieve state-of-the-art performance, fine-tuned LLMs surpass the performance of naive baseline models and perform on par with standard Bayesian Knowledge Tracing approaches.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-29T14:06:34Z) - Characterizing Truthfulness in Large Language Model Generations with
Local Intrinsic Dimension [63.330262740414646]
We study how to characterize and predict the truthfulness of texts generated from large language models (LLMs)
We suggest investigating internal activations and quantifying LLM's truthfulness using the local intrinsic dimension (LID) of model activations.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-28T04:56:21Z) - Rethinking Interpretability in the Era of Large Language Models [76.1947554386879]
Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities across a wide array of tasks.
The capability to explain in natural language allows LLMs to expand the scale and complexity of patterns that can be given to a human.
These new capabilities raise new challenges, such as hallucinated explanations and immense computational costs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-01-30T17:38:54Z) - Supervised Knowledge Makes Large Language Models Better In-context Learners [94.89301696512776]
Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit emerging in-context learning abilities through prompt engineering.
The challenge of improving the generalizability and factuality of LLMs in natural language understanding and question answering remains under-explored.
We propose a framework that enhances the reliability of LLMs as it: 1) generalizes out-of-distribution data, 2) elucidates how LLMs benefit from discriminative models, and 3) minimizes hallucinations in generative tasks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-12-26T07:24:46Z) - Human Still Wins over LLM: An Empirical Study of Active Learning on
Domain-Specific Annotation Tasks [37.56584999012332]
Small models can outperform GPT-3.5 with a few hundreds of labeled data, and they achieve higher or similar performance with GPT-4 despite that they are hundreds time smaller.
Based on these findings, we posit that LLM predictions can be used as a warmup method in real-world applications.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-16T11:51:13Z) - Are Large Language Models Reliable Judges? A Study on the Factuality
Evaluation Capabilities of LLMs [8.526956860672698]
Large Language Models (LLMs) have gained immense attention due to their notable emergent capabilities.
This study investigates the potential of LLMs as reliable assessors of factual consistency in summaries generated by text-generation models.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-01T17:42:45Z) - Survey on Factuality in Large Language Models: Knowledge, Retrieval and
Domain-Specificity [61.54815512469125]
This survey addresses the crucial issue of factuality in Large Language Models (LLMs)
As LLMs find applications across diverse domains, the reliability and accuracy of their outputs become vital.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-11T14:18:03Z) - TRACE: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Continual Learning in Large
Language Models [52.734140807634624]
Aligned large language models (LLMs) demonstrate exceptional capabilities in task-solving, following instructions, and ensuring safety.
Existing continual learning benchmarks lack sufficient challenge for leading aligned LLMs.
We introduce TRACE, a novel benchmark designed to evaluate continual learning in LLMs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-10T16:38:49Z)
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.