Promoting Equality in Large Language Models: Identifying and Mitigating the Implicit Bias based on Bayesian Theory

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2408.10608v1
• Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2024 07:40:12 GMT
• Title: Promoting Equality in Large Language Models: Identifying and Mitigating the Implicit Bias based on Bayesian Theory
• Authors: Yongxin Deng, Xihe Qiu, Xiaoyu Tan, Jing Pan, Chen Jue, Zhijun Fang, Yinghui Xu, Wei Chu, Yuan Qi,
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) are trained on extensive text corpora, which inevitably include biased information. We have formally defined the implicit bias problem and developed an innovative framework for bias removal based on Bayesian theory.
• Score: 29.201402717025335
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are trained on extensive text corpora, which inevitably include biased information. Although techniques such as Affective Alignment can mitigate some negative impacts of these biases, existing prompt-based attack methods can still extract these biases from the model's weights. Moreover, these biases frequently appear subtly when LLMs are prompted to perform identical tasks across different demographic groups, thereby camouflaging their presence. To address this issue, we have formally defined the implicit bias problem and developed an innovative framework for bias removal based on Bayesian theory, Bayesian-Theory based Bias Removal (BTBR). BTBR employs likelihood ratio screening to pinpoint data entries within publicly accessible biased datasets that represent biases inadvertently incorporated during the LLM training phase. It then automatically constructs relevant knowledge triples and expunges bias information from LLMs using model editing techniques. Through extensive experimentation, we have confirmed the presence of the implicit bias problem in LLMs and demonstrated the effectiveness of our BTBR approach.

Related papers

• Unboxing Occupational Bias: Grounded Debiasing of LLMs with U.S. Labor Data [9.90951705988724]
  Large Language Models (LLM) are prone to inheriting and amplifying societal biases. LLM bias can have far-reaching consequences, leading to unfair practices and exacerbating social inequalities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-20T23:54:26Z)
• Editable Fairness: Fine-Grained Bias Mitigation in Language Models [52.66450426729818]
  We propose a novel debiasing approach, Fairness Stamp (FAST), which enables fine-grained calibration of individual social biases. FAST surpasses state-of-the-art baselines with superior debiasing performance. This highlights the potential of fine-grained debiasing strategies to achieve fairness in large language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-07T17:14:58Z)
• The African Woman is Rhythmic and Soulful: An Investigation of Implicit Biases in LLM Open-ended Text Generation [3.9945212716333063]
  Implicit biases are significant because they influence the decisions made by Large Language Models (LLMs) Traditionally, explicit bias tests or embedding-based methods are employed to detect bias, but these approaches can overlook more nuanced, implicit forms of bias. We introduce two novel psychological-inspired methodologies to reveal and measure implicit biases through prompt-based and decision-making tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-01T13:21:33Z)
• Towards Understanding Task-agnostic Debiasing Through the Lenses of Intrinsic Bias and Forgetfulness [10.081447621656523]
  The impact on language modeling ability can be alleviated given a high-quality and long-contextualized debiasing corpus. The effectiveness of task-agnostic debiasing hinges on the quantitative bias level of both the task-specific data used for downstream applications and the debiased model. We propose a novel framework which can Propagate Socially-fair Debiasing to Downstream Fine-tuning, ProSocialTuning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-06T15:11:11Z)
• Investigating Bias in LLM-Based Bias Detection: Disparities between LLMs and Human Perception [13.592532358127293]
  We investigate the presence and nature of bias within Large Language Models (LLMs) We probe whether LLMs exhibit biases, particularly in political bias prediction and text continuation tasks. We propose debiasing strategies, including prompt engineering and model fine-tuning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-22T00:59:48Z)
• Take Care of Your Prompt Bias! Investigating and Mitigating Prompt Bias in Factual Knowledge Extraction [56.17020601803071]
  Recent research shows that pre-trained language models (PLMs) suffer from "prompt bias" in factual knowledge extraction. This paper aims to improve the reliability of existing benchmarks by thoroughly investigating and mitigating prompt bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-15T02:04:35Z)
• Self-Debiasing Large Language Models: Zero-Shot Recognition and Reduction of Stereotypes [73.12947922129261]
  We leverage the zero-shot capabilities of large language models to reduce stereotyping. We show that self-debiasing can significantly reduce the degree of stereotyping across nine different social groups. We hope this work opens inquiry into other zero-shot techniques for bias mitigation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-03T01:40:11Z)
• GPTBIAS: A Comprehensive Framework for Evaluating Bias in Large Language Models [83.30078426829627]
  Large language models (LLMs) have gained popularity and are being widely adopted by a large user community. The existing evaluation methods have many constraints, and their results exhibit a limited degree of interpretability. We propose a bias evaluation framework named GPTBIAS that leverages the high performance of LLMs to assess bias in models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-11T12:02:14Z)
• Exploring the Jungle of Bias: Political Bias Attribution in Language Models via Dependency Analysis [86.49858739347412]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have sparked intense debate regarding the prevalence of bias in these models and its mitigation. We propose a prompt-based method for the extraction of confounding and mediating attributes which contribute to the decision process. We find that the observed disparate treatment can at least in part be attributed to confounding and mitigating attributes and model misalignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-15T00:02:25Z)
• A Trip Towards Fairness: Bias and De-Biasing in Large Language Models [1.987426401990999]
  Cheap-to-Build Very Large-Language Models (CtB-LLMs) with affordable training are emerging as the next big revolution in natural language processing and understanding. In this paper, we performed a large investigation of the bias of three families of CtB-LLMs. We show that debiasing techniques are effective and usable.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-23T09:35:37Z)
• Learning from others' mistakes: Avoiding dataset biases without modeling them [111.17078939377313]
  State-of-the-art natural language processing (NLP) models often learn to model dataset biases and surface form correlations instead of features that target the intended task. Previous work has demonstrated effective methods to circumvent these issues when knowledge of the bias is available. We show a method for training models that learn to ignore these problematic correlations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-02T16:10:54Z)

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.