With a Grain of SALT: Are LLMs Fair Across Social Dimensions?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.12499v1
• Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2024 12:22:47 GMT
• Title: With a Grain of SALT: Are LLMs Fair Across Social Dimensions?
• Authors: Samee Arif, Zohaib Khan, Agha Ali Raza, Awais Athar,
• Abstract summary: This paper presents an analysis of biases in open-source Large Language Models (LLMs) across various genders, religions, and races. We introduce a methodology for generating a bias detection dataset using seven bias triggers: General Debate, Positioned Debate, Career Advice, Story Generation, Problem-Solving, Cover-Letter Writing, and CV Generation. We anonymise the LLM-generated text associated with each group using GPT-4o-mini and do a pairwise comparison using GPT-4o-as-a-Judge.
• Score: 3.979019316355144
• License:
• Abstract: This paper presents an analysis of biases in open-source Large Language Models (LLMs) across various genders, religions, and races. We introduce a methodology for generating a bias detection dataset using seven bias triggers: General Debate, Positioned Debate, Career Advice, Story Generation, Problem-Solving, Cover-Letter Writing, and CV Generation. We use GPT-4o to generate a diverse set of prompts for each trigger across various genders, religious and racial groups. We evaluate models from Llama and Gemma family on the generated dataset. We anonymise the LLM-generated text associated with each group using GPT-4o-mini and do a pairwise comparison using GPT-4o-as-a-Judge. To quantify bias in the LLM-generated text we use the number of wins and losses in the pairwise comparison. Our analysis spans three languages, English, German, and Arabic to explore how language influences bias manifestation. Our findings reveal that LLMs exhibit strong polarization toward certain groups across each category, with a notable consistency observed across models. However, when switching languages, variations and anomalies emerge, often attributable to cultural cues and contextual differences.

Related papers

• Towards Resource Efficient and Interpretable Bias Mitigation in Large Language Models [1.787433808079955]
  Large language models (LLMs) have been observed to perpetuate unwanted biases in training data. In this paper, we mitigate bias by leveraging small biased and anti-biased expert models to obtain a debiasing signal. Experiments on mitigating gender, race, and religion biases show a reduction in bias on several local and global bias metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-02T16:56:08Z)
• Attention Speaks Volumes: Localizing and Mitigating Bias in Language Models [15.53216696218776]
  We explore the internal mechanisms of how bias emerges in large language models (LLMs) when provided with ambiguous comparative prompts. We propose $textttATLAS$, a technique to localize bias to specific layers of the LLM by analyzing attention scores and then reduce bias by scaling attention in these biased layers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-29T20:15:56Z)
• 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)
• GenderBias-\emph{VL}: Benchmarking Gender Bias in Vision Language Models via Counterfactual Probing [72.0343083866144]
  This paper introduces the GenderBias-emphVL benchmark to evaluate occupation-related gender bias in Large Vision-Language Models. Using our benchmark, we extensively evaluate 15 commonly used open-source LVLMs and state-of-the-art commercial APIs. Our findings reveal widespread gender biases in existing LVLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-30T05:55:15Z)
• VLBiasBench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Evaluating Bias in Large Vision-Language Model [72.13121434085116]
  We introduce VLBiasBench, a benchmark to evaluate biases in Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) VLBiasBench features a dataset that covers nine distinct categories of social biases, including age, disability status, gender, nationality, physical appearance, race, religion, profession, social economic status, as well as two intersectional bias categories: race x gender and race x social economic status. We conduct extensive evaluations on 15 open-source models as well as two advanced closed-source models, yielding new insights into the biases present in these models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T10:56:59Z)
• JobFair: A Framework for Benchmarking Gender Hiring Bias in Large Language Models [12.12628747941818]
  This paper presents a novel framework for benchmarking hierarchical gender hiring bias in Large Language Models (LLMs) for resume scoring. We introduce a new construct grounded in labour economics, legal principles, and critiques of current bias benchmarks. We analyze gender hiring biases in ten state-of-the-art LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-17T09:15:57Z)
• 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)
• Do Not Harm Protected Groups in Debiasing Language Representation Models [2.9057513016551244]
  Language Representation Models (LRMs) trained with real-world data may capture and exacerbate undesired bias. We examine four debiasing techniques on a real-world text classification task and show that reducing biasing is at the cost of degrading performance for all demographic groups.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-27T20:11:38Z)
• Balancing out Bias: Achieving Fairness Through Training Reweighting [58.201275105195485]
  Bias in natural language processing arises from models learning characteristics of the author such as gender and race. Existing methods for mitigating and measuring bias do not directly account for correlations between author demographics and linguistic variables. This paper introduces a very simple but highly effective method for countering bias using instance reweighting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-16T23:40:28Z)
• Towards Controllable Biases in Language Generation [87.89632038677912]
  We develop a method to induce societal biases in generated text when input prompts contain mentions of specific demographic groups. We analyze two scenarios: 1) inducing negative biases for one demographic and positive biases for another demographic, and 2) equalizing biases between demographics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-01T08:25:11Z)

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.