Does RAG Introduce Unfairness in LLMs? Evaluating Fairness in Retrieval-Augmented Generation Systems

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2409.19804v1
• Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2024 22:04:26 GMT
• Title: Does RAG Introduce Unfairness in LLMs? Evaluating Fairness in Retrieval-Augmented Generation Systems
• Authors: Xuyang Wu, Shuowei Li, Hsin-Tai Wu, Zhiqiang Tao, Yi Fang,
• Abstract summary: RAG (Retrieval-Augmented Generation) have recently gained significant attention for their enhanced ability to integrate external knowledge sources. We propose a fairness evaluation framework tailored to RAG methods, using scenario-based questions and analyzing disparities across demographic attributes.
• Score: 18.926129063000264
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: RAG (Retrieval-Augmented Generation) have recently gained significant attention for their enhanced ability to integrate external knowledge sources in open-domain question answering (QA) tasks. However, it remains unclear how these models address fairness concerns, particularly with respect to sensitive attributes such as gender, geographic location, and other demographic factors. First, as language models evolve to prioritize utility, like improving exact match accuracy, fairness may have been largely overlooked. Second, RAG methods are complex pipelines, making it hard to identify and address biases, as each component is optimized for different goals. In this paper, we aim to empirically evaluate fairness in several RAG methods. We propose a fairness evaluation framework tailored to RAG methods, using scenario-based questions and analyzing disparities across demographic attributes. The experimental results indicate that, despite recent advances in utility-driven optimization, fairness issues persist in both the retrieval and generation stages, highlighting the need for more targeted fairness interventions within RAG pipelines. We will release our dataset and code upon acceptance of the paper.

Related papers

• HawkBench: Investigating Resilience of RAG Methods on Stratified Information-Seeking Tasks [50.871243190126826]
  HawkBench is a human-labeled, multi-domain benchmark designed to rigorously assess RAG performance. By stratifying tasks based on information-seeking behaviors, HawkBench provides a systematic evaluation of how well RAG systems adapt to diverse user needs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-19T06:33:39Z)
• LLMs are Biased Evaluators But Not Biased for Retrieval Augmented Generation [28.61326111959728]
  Large language models (LLMs) exhibit significant biases in evaluation tasks, particularly in preferentially rating and favoring self-generated content. Our study addresses this knowledge gap by simulating two critical phases of the retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) framework. Contrary to previous findings, our results reveal no significant self-preference effect in RAG frameworks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-28T08:32:09Z)
• CoFE-RAG: A Comprehensive Full-chain Evaluation Framework for Retrieval-Augmented Generation with Enhanced Data Diversity [23.48167670445722]
  Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) aims to generate more accurate and reliable answers with the help of the retrieved context from external knowledge sources. evaluating these systems remains a crucial research area due to the following issues. We propose a Comprehensive Full-chain Evaluation (CoFE-RAG) framework to facilitate thorough evaluation across the entire RAG pipeline.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-16T05:20:32Z)
• No Free Lunch: Retrieval-Augmented Generation Undermines Fairness in LLMs, Even for Vigilant Users [21.25007065608671]
  Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) is widely adopted for its effectiveness and cost-efficiency. This study proposes a practical three-level threat model from the perspective of user awareness of fairness. We examine the fairness implications of RAG using uncensored, partially censored, and fully censored datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-10T03:51:58Z)
• Controlling Risk of Retrieval-augmented Generation: A Counterfactual Prompting Framework [77.45983464131977]
  We focus on how likely it is that a RAG model's prediction is incorrect, resulting in uncontrollable risks in real-world applications. Our research identifies two critical latent factors affecting RAG's confidence in its predictions. We develop a counterfactual prompting framework that induces the models to alter these factors and analyzes the effect on their answers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-24T14:52:14Z)
• Towards Fair RAG: On the Impact of Fair Ranking in Retrieval-Augmented Generation [53.285436927963865]
  This paper presents the first systematic evaluation of RAG systems integrated with fair rankings. We focus specifically on measuring the fair exposure of each relevant item across the rankings utilized by RAG systems. Our findings indicate that RAG systems with fair rankings can maintain a high level of generation quality and, in many cases, even outperform traditional RAG systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-17T23:10:04Z)
• RAGEval: Scenario Specific RAG Evaluation Dataset Generation Framework [69.4501863547618]
  This paper introduces RAGEval, a framework designed to assess RAG systems across diverse scenarios. With a focus on factual accuracy, we propose three novel metrics Completeness, Hallucination, and Irrelevance. Experimental results show that RAGEval outperforms zero-shot and one-shot methods in terms of clarity, safety, conformity, and richness of generated samples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-02T13:35:11Z)
• Thinking Racial Bias in Fair Forgery Detection: Models, Datasets and Evaluations [63.52709761339949]
  We first contribute a dedicated dataset called the Fair Forgery Detection (FairFD) dataset, where we prove the racial bias of public state-of-the-art (SOTA) methods. We design novel metrics including Approach Averaged Metric and Utility Regularized Metric, which can avoid deceptive results. We also present an effective and robust post-processing technique, Bias Pruning with Fair Activations (BPFA), which improves fairness without requiring retraining or weight updates.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-19T14:53:18Z)
• Fairness meets Cross-Domain Learning: a new perspective on Models and Metrics [80.07271410743806]
  We study the relationship between cross-domain learning (CD) and model fairness. We introduce a benchmark on face and medical images spanning several demographic groups as well as classification and localization tasks. Our study covers 14 CD approaches alongside three state-of-the-art fairness algorithms and shows how the former can outperform the latter.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-25T09:34:05Z)

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.