GECOBench: A Gender-Controlled Text Dataset and Benchmark for Quantifying Biases in Explanations

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2406.11547v1
• Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2024 13:44:37 GMT
• Title: GECOBench: A Gender-Controlled Text Dataset and Benchmark for Quantifying Biases in Explanations
• Authors: Rick Wilming, Artur Dox, Hjalmar Schulz, Marta Oliveira, Benedict Clark, Stefan Haufe,
• Abstract summary: We create a gender-controlled text dataset, GECO, in which otherwise identical sentences appear in male and female forms. This gives rise to ground-truth 'world explanations' for gender classification tasks. We also provide GECOBench, a rigorous quantitative evaluation framework benchmarking popular XAI methods.
• Score: 1.0000511213628438
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large pre-trained language models have become popular for many applications and form an important backbone of many downstream tasks in natural language processing (NLP). Applying 'explainable artificial intelligence' (XAI) techniques to enrich such models' outputs is considered crucial for assuring their quality and shedding light on their inner workings. However, large language models are trained on a plethora of data containing a variety of biases, such as gender biases, affecting model weights and, potentially, behavior. Currently, it is unclear to what extent such biases also impact model explanations in possibly unfavorable ways. We create a gender-controlled text dataset, GECO, in which otherwise identical sentences appear in male and female forms. This gives rise to ground-truth 'world explanations' for gender classification tasks, enabling the objective evaluation of the correctness of XAI methods. We also provide GECOBench, a rigorous quantitative evaluation framework benchmarking popular XAI methods, applying them to pre-trained language models fine-tuned to different degrees. This allows us to investigate how pre-training induces undesirable bias in model explanations and to what extent fine-tuning can mitigate such explanation bias. We show a clear dependency between explanation performance and the number of fine-tuned layers, where XAI methods are observed to particularly benefit from fine-tuning or complete retraining of embedding layers. Remarkably, this relationship holds for models achieving similar classification performance on the same task. With that, we highlight the utility of the proposed gender-controlled dataset and novel benchmarking approach for research and development of novel XAI methods. All code including dataset generation, model training, evaluation and visualization is available at: https://github.com/braindatalab/gecobench

Related papers

• How Hard is this Test Set? NLI Characterization by Exploiting Training Dynamics [49.9329723199239]
  We propose a method for the automated creation of a challenging test set without relying on the manual construction of artificial and unrealistic examples. We categorize the test set of popular NLI datasets into three difficulty levels by leveraging methods that exploit training dynamics. When our characterization method is applied to the training set, models trained with only a fraction of the data achieve comparable performance to those trained on the full dataset.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-04T13:39:21Z)
• Influence Scores at Scale for Efficient Language Data Sampling [3.072340427031969]
  "influence scores" are used to identify important subsets of data. In this paper, we explore the applicability of influence scores in language classification tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-27T20:19:22Z)
• Learning Defect Prediction from Unrealistic Data [57.53586547895278]
  Pretrained models of code have become popular choices for code understanding and generation tasks. Such models tend to be large and require commensurate volumes of training data. It has become popular to train models with far larger but less realistic datasets, such as functions with artificially injected bugs. Models trained on such data tend to only perform well on similar data, while underperforming on real world programs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-02T01:51:43Z)
• Stubborn Lexical Bias in Data and Models [50.79738900885665]
  We use a new statistical method to examine whether spurious patterns in data appear in models trained on the data. We apply an optimization approach to *reweight* the training data, reducing thousands of spurious correlations. Surprisingly, though this method can successfully reduce lexical biases in the training data, we still find strong evidence of corresponding bias in the trained models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-03T20:12:27Z)
• Quantifying Human Bias and Knowledge to guide ML models during Training [0.0]
  We introduce an experimental approach to dealing with skewed datasets by including humans in the training process. We ask humans to rank the importance of features of the dataset, and through rank aggregation, determine the initial weight bias for the model. We show that collective human bias can allow ML models to learn insights about the true population instead of the biased sample.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-19T20:49:07Z)
• An Empirical Investigation of Commonsense Self-Supervision with Knowledge Graphs [67.23285413610243]
  Self-supervision based on the information extracted from large knowledge graphs has been shown to improve the generalization of language models. We study the effect of knowledge sampling strategies and sizes that can be used to generate synthetic data for adapting language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-21T19:49:04Z)
• Distraction is All You Need for Fairness [0.0]
  We propose a strategy for training deep learning models called the Distraction module. This method can be theoretically proven effective in controlling bias from affecting the classification results. We demonstrate the potency of the proposed method by testing it on UCI Adult and Heritage Health datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-03-15T01:46:55Z)
• Interpretable Data-Based Explanations for Fairness Debugging [7.266116143672294]
  Gopher is a system that produces compact, interpretable, and causal explanations for bias or unexpected model behavior. We introduce the concept of causal responsibility that quantifies the extent to which intervening on training data by removing or updating subsets of it can resolve the bias. Building on this concept, we develop an efficient approach for generating the top-k patterns that explain model bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-12-17T20:10:00Z)
• Does Data Repair Lead to Fair Models? Curating Contextually Fair Data To Reduce Model Bias [10.639605996067534]
  Contextual information is a valuable cue for Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) to learn better representations and improve accuracy. In COCO, many object categories have a much higher co-occurrence with men compared to women, which can bias a DNN's prediction in favor of men. We introduce a data repair algorithm using the coefficient of variation, which can curate fair and contextually balanced data for a protected class.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-20T06:00:03Z)
• Improving Gender Fairness of Pre-Trained Language Models without Catastrophic Forgetting [88.83117372793737]
  Forgetting information in the original training data may damage the model's downstream performance by a large margin. We propose GEnder Equality Prompt (GEEP) to improve gender fairness of pre-trained models with less forgetting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-11T15:52:16Z)
• Unsupervised Paraphrasing with Pretrained Language Models [85.03373221588707]
  We propose a training pipeline that enables pre-trained language models to generate high-quality paraphrases in an unsupervised setting. Our recipe consists of task-adaptation, self-supervision, and a novel decoding algorithm named Dynamic Blocking. We show with automatic and human evaluations that our approach achieves state-of-the-art performance on both the Quora Question Pair and the ParaNMT datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-24T11:55:28Z)

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.