Generative Monoculture in Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2407.02209v1
• Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2024 12:17:07 GMT
• Title: Generative Monoculture in Large Language Models
• Authors: Fan Wu, Emily Black, Varun Chandrasekaran,
• Abstract summary: generative monoculture is a behavior observed in large language models (LLMs) We experimentally demonstrate the prevalence of generative monoculture through analysis of book review and code generation tasks.
• Score: 17.164060958337032
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: We introduce {\em generative monoculture}, a behavior observed in large language models (LLMs) characterized by a significant narrowing of model output diversity relative to available training data for a given task: for example, generating only positive book reviews for books with a mixed reception. While in some cases, generative monoculture enhances performance (e.g., LLMs more often produce efficient code), the dangers are exacerbated in others (e.g., LLMs refuse to share diverse opinions). As LLMs are increasingly used in high-impact settings such as education and web search, careful maintenance of LLM output diversity is essential to ensure a variety of facts and perspectives are preserved over time. We experimentally demonstrate the prevalence of generative monoculture through analysis of book review and code generation tasks, and find that simple countermeasures such as altering sampling or prompting strategies are insufficient to mitigate the behavior. Moreover, our results suggest that the root causes of generative monoculture are likely embedded within the LLM's alignment processes, suggesting a need for developing fine-tuning paradigms that preserve or promote diversity.

Related papers

• Diverse Preference Learning for Capabilities and Alignment [10.209224108636194]
  Recent studies reveal that alignment algorithms such as RLHF and DPO significantly reduce the diversity of LLM outputs.<n>We propose Soft Preference Learning, which decouples the entropy and cross-entropy terms in the KL penalty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-29T17:29:24Z)
• Epistemic Diversity and Knowledge Collapse in Large Language Models [42.81169404715417]
  Large language models (LLMs) tend to generate lexically, semantically, and stylistically homogenous texts.<n>This poses a risk of knowledge collapse, where homogenous LLMs mediate a shrinking in the range of accessible information over time.<n>We present a new methodology to measure epistemic diversity, i.e., variation in real-world claims in LLM outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-05T14:29:15Z)
• Which Cultural Lens Do Models Adopt? On Cultural Positioning Bias and Agentic Mitigation in LLMs [53.07843733899881]
  Large language models (LLMs) have unlocked a wide range of downstream generative applications.<n>We find that they also risk perpetuating subtle fairness issues tied to culture, positioning their generations from the perspectives of the mainstream US culture.<n>We propose 2 inference-time mitigation methods to resolve these biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-25T12:28:25Z)
• Do Large Language Models Understand Morality Across Cultures? [0.5356944479760104]
  This study investigates the extent to which large language models capture cross-cultural differences and similarities in moral perspectives.<n>Our results reveal that current LLMs often fail to reproduce the full spectrum of cross-cultural moral variation.<n>These findings highlight a pressing need for more robust approaches to mitigate biases and improve cultural representativeness in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-28T20:25:36Z)
• MLLMs are Deeply Affected by Modality Bias [158.64371871084478]
  Recent advances in Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have shown promising results in integrating diverse modalities such as texts and images.<n>MLLMs are heavily influenced by modality bias, often relying on language while under-utilizing other modalities like visual inputs.<n>This paper argues that MLLMs are deeply affected by modality bias, highlighting its manifestations across various tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-24T11:49:31Z)
• Toward Inclusive Educational AI: Auditing Frontier LLMs through a Multiplexity Lens [1.094065133109559]
  This paper proposes a framework to assess and mitigate cultural bias within large language models (LLMs) Our analysis reveals that LLMs frequently exhibit cultural polarization, with biases appearing in both overt and subtle contextual cues. We propose two strategies: textitContextually-Implemented Multiplex LLMs, which embed multiplex principles directly into the system prompt, and textitMulti-Agent System (MAS)-Implemented Multiplex LLMs, where multiple LLM agents, each representing distinct cultural viewpoints, collaboratively generate a balanced, synthesized response.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-02T11:27:08Z)
• Social Debiasing for Fair Multi-modal LLMs [55.8071045346024]
  Multi-modal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have advanced significantly, offering powerful vision-language understanding capabilities. However, these models often inherit severe social biases from their training datasets, leading to unfair predictions based on attributes like race and gender. This paper addresses the issue of social biases in MLLMs by i) Introducing a comprehensive Counterfactual dataset with Multiple Social Concepts (CMSC) and ii) Proposing an Anti-Stereotype Debiasing strategy (ASD)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-13T02:08:32Z)
• Let Me Speak Freely? A Study on the Impact of Format Restrictions on Performance of Large Language Models [59.970391602080205]
  This study investigates whether such constraints on generation space impact LLMs abilities, including reasoning and domain knowledge comprehension. We evaluate LLMs performance when restricted to adhere to structured formats versus generating free-form responses across various common tasks. We find that stricter format constraints generally lead to greater performance degradation in reasoning tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-05T13:08:24Z)
• REQUAL-LM: Reliability and Equity through Aggregation in Large Language Models [10.684722193666607]
  We introduce REQUAL-LM, a novel method for finding reliable and equitable large language models (LLMs) outputs through aggregation. Specifically, we develop a Monte Carlo method based on repeated sampling to find a reliable output close to the mean of the underlying distribution of possible outputs. We formally define the terms such as reliability and bias, and design an equity-aware aggregation to minimize harmful bias while finding a highly reliable output.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-17T22:12:41Z)
• Bias Amplification in Language Model Evolution: An Iterated Learning Perspective [27.63295869974611]
  We draw parallels between the behavior of Large Language Models (LLMs) and the evolution of human culture. Our approach involves leveraging Iterated Learning (IL), a Bayesian framework that elucidates how subtle biases are magnified during human cultural evolution. This paper outlines key characteristics of agents' behavior in the Bayesian-IL framework, including predictions that are supported by experimental verification.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-04T02:01:25Z)
• Unveiling the Generalization Power of Fine-Tuned Large Language Models [81.70754292058258]
  We investigate whether fine-tuning affects the intrinsic generalization ability intrinsic to Large Language Models (LLMs) Our main findings reveal that models fine-tuned on generation and classification tasks exhibit dissimilar behaviors in generalizing to different domains and tasks. We observe that integrating the in-context learning strategy during fine-tuning on generation tasks can enhance the model's generalization ability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-14T08:18:59Z)
• Debiasing Multimodal Large Language Models [61.6896704217147]
  Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) have become indispensable tools in computer vision and natural language processing. Our investigation reveals a noteworthy bias in the generated content, where the output is primarily influenced by the underlying Large Language Models (LLMs) prior to the input image. To rectify these biases and redirect the model's focus toward vision information, we introduce two simple, training-free strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-08T12:35:07Z)
• 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)
• A Group Fairness Lens for Large Language Models [34.0579082699443]
  Large language models can perpetuate biases and unfairness when deployed in social media contexts. We propose evaluating LLM biases from a group fairness lens using a novel hierarchical schema characterizing diverse social groups. We pioneer a novel chain-of-thought method GF-Think to mitigate biases of LLMs from a group fairness perspective.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-24T13:25:15Z)
• Mind's Mirror: Distilling Self-Evaluation Capability and Comprehensive Thinking from Large Language Models [20.28989820878285]
  Large language models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable advancements in natural language processing. The massive scale and computational demands of these models present formidable challenges when considering their practical deployment in resource-constrained environments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-15T18:56:23Z)
• Are Large Language Models Really Robust to Word-Level Perturbations? [68.60618778027694]
  We propose a novel rational evaluation approach that leverages pre-trained reward models as diagnostic tools. Longer conversations manifest the comprehensive grasp of language models in terms of their proficiency in understanding questions. Our results demonstrate that LLMs frequently exhibit vulnerability to word-level perturbations that are commonplace in daily language usage.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-20T09:23:46Z)

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.