Taxonomy-based CheckList for Large Language Model Evaluation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2402.10899v1
• Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2023 12:58:07 GMT
• Title: Taxonomy-based CheckList for Large Language Model Evaluation
• Authors: Damin Zhang,
• Abstract summary: We introduce human knowledge into natural language interventions and study pre-trained language models' (LMs) behaviors. Inspired by CheckList behavioral testing, we present a checklist-style task that aims to probe and quantify LMs' unethical behaviors.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: As large language models (LLMs) have been used in many downstream tasks, the internal stereotypical representation may affect the fairness of the outputs. In this work, we introduce human knowledge into natural language interventions and study pre-trained language models' (LMs) behaviors within the context of gender bias. Inspired by CheckList behavioral testing, we present a checklist-style task that aims to probe and quantify LMs' unethical behaviors through question-answering (QA). We design three comparison studies to evaluate LMs from four aspects: consistency, biased tendency, model preference, and gender preference switch. We probe one transformer-based QA model trained on SQuAD-v2 dataset and one autoregressive large language model. Our results indicate that transformer-based QA model's biased tendency positively correlates with its consistency, whereas LLM shows the opposite relation. Our proposed task provides the first dataset that involves human knowledge for LLM bias evaluation.

Related papers

• Hire Me or Not? Examining Language Model's Behavior with Occupation Attributes [7.718858707298602]
  Large language models (LLMs) have been widely integrated into production pipelines, like recruitment and recommendation systems. This paper investigates LLMs' behavior with respect to gender stereotypes, in the context of occupation decision making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-06T18:09:32Z)
• Evaluating Generative Language Models in Information Extraction as Subjective Question Correction [49.729908337372436]
  We propose a new evaluation method, SQC-Score. Inspired by the principles in subjective question correction, we propose a new evaluation method, SQC-Score. Results on three information extraction tasks show that SQC-Score is more preferred by human annotators than the baseline metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-04T15:36:53Z)
• Measuring Social Biases in Masked Language Models by Proxy of Prediction Quality [0.0]
  Social political scientists often aim to discover and measure distinct biases from text data representations (embeddings) In this paper, we evaluate the social biases encoded by transformers trained with a masked language modeling objective. We find that proposed measures produce more accurate estimations of relative preference for biased sentences between transformers than others based on our methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-21T17:33:13Z)
• CLOMO: Counterfactual Logical Modification with Large Language Models [109.60793869938534]
  We introduce a novel task, Counterfactual Logical Modification (CLOMO), and a high-quality human-annotated benchmark. In this task, LLMs must adeptly alter a given argumentative text to uphold a predetermined logical relationship. We propose an innovative evaluation metric, the Self-Evaluation Score (SES), to directly evaluate the natural language output of LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-29T08:29:54Z)
• Think Twice: Measuring the Efficiency of Eliminating Prediction Shortcuts of Question Answering Models [3.9052860539161918]
  We propose a simple method for measuring a scale of models' reliance on any identified spurious feature. We assess the robustness towards a large set of known and newly found prediction biases for various pre-trained models and debiasing methods in Question Answering (QA) We find that while existing debiasing methods can mitigate reliance on a chosen spurious feature, the OOD performance gains of these methods can not be explained by mitigated reliance on biased features.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-11T14:35:00Z)
• Training Language Models with Language Feedback at Scale [50.70091340506957]
  We introduce learning from Language Feedback (ILF), a new approach that utilizes more informative language feedback. ILF consists of three steps that are applied iteratively: first, conditioning the language model on the input, an initial LM output, and feedback to generate refinements. We show theoretically that ILF can be viewed as Bayesian Inference, similar to Reinforcement Learning from human feedback.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-28T17:04:15Z)
• On the Transferability of Pre-trained Language Models: A Study from Artificial Datasets [74.11825654535895]
  Pre-training language models (LMs) on large-scale unlabeled text data makes the model much easier to achieve exceptional downstream performance. We study what specific traits in the pre-training data, other than the semantics, make a pre-trained LM superior to their counterparts trained from scratch on downstream tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-08T10:39:57Z)
• Learning to Perturb Word Embeddings for Out-of-distribution QA [55.103586220757464]
  We propose a simple yet effective DA method based on a noise generator, which learns to perturb the word embedding of the input questions and context without changing their semantics. We validate the performance of the QA models trained with our word embedding on a single source dataset, on five different target domains. Notably, the model trained with ours outperforms the model trained with more than 240K artificially generated QA pairs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-06T14:12:26Z)
• Masked Language Modeling and the Distributional Hypothesis: Order Word Matters Pre-training for Little [74.49773960145681]
  A possible explanation for the impressive performance of masked language model (MLM)-training is that such models have learned to represent the syntactic structures prevalent in NLP pipelines. In this paper, we propose a different explanation: pre-trains succeed on downstream tasks almost entirely due to their ability to model higher-order word co-occurrence statistics. Our results show that purely distributional information largely explains the success of pre-training, and underscore the importance of curating challenging evaluation datasets that require deeper linguistic knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-14T06:30:36Z)

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.