Anchoring Bias in Large Language Models: An Experimental Study
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2412.06593v2
- Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2024 14:08:45 GMT
- Title: Anchoring Bias in Large Language Models: An Experimental Study
- Authors: Jiaxu Lou, Yifan Sun,
- Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) like GPT-4 and Gemini have significantly advanced artificial intelligence.
This study delves into anchoring bias, a cognitive bias where initial information disproportionately influences judgment.
- Score: 5.229564709919574
- License:
- Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) like GPT-4 and Gemini have significantly advanced artificial intelligence by enabling machines to generate and comprehend human-like text. Despite their impressive capabilities, LLMs are not immune to limitations, including various biases. While much research has explored demographic biases, the cognitive biases in LLMs have not been equally scrutinized. This study delves into anchoring bias, a cognitive bias where initial information disproportionately influences judgment. Utilizing an experimental dataset, we examine how anchoring bias manifests in LLMs and verify the effectiveness of various mitigation strategies. Our findings highlight the sensitivity of LLM responses to biased hints. At the same time, our experiments show that, to mitigate anchoring bias, one needs to collect hints from comprehensive angles to prevent the LLMs from being anchored to individual pieces of information, while simple algorithms such as Chain-of-Thought, Thoughts of Principles, Ignoring Anchor Hints, and Reflection are not sufficient.
Related papers
- AI Can Be Cognitively Biased: An Exploratory Study on Threshold Priming in LLM-Based Batch Relevance Assessment [37.985947029716016]
Large language models (LLMs) have shown advanced understanding capabilities but may inherit human biases from their training data.
We investigated whether LLMs are influenced by the threshold priming effect in relevance judgments.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-09-24T12:23:15Z) - 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) - UniBias: Unveiling and Mitigating LLM Bias through Internal Attention and FFN Manipulation [12.04811490937078]
We investigate how feedforward neural networks (FFNs) and attention heads result in the bias of large language models (LLMs)
To mitigate these biases, we introduce UniBias, an inference-only method that effectively identifies and eliminates biased FFN vectors and attention heads.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-05-31T03:59:15Z) - 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) - 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) - Cognitive Bias in Decision-Making with LLMs [19.87475562475802]
Large language models (LLMs) offer significant potential as tools to support an expanding range of decision-making tasks.
LLMs have been shown to inherit societal biases against protected groups, as well as be subject to bias functionally resembling cognitive bias.
Our work introduces BiasBuster, a framework designed to uncover, evaluate, and mitigate cognitive bias in LLMs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-25T02:35:56Z) - Pride and Prejudice: LLM Amplifies Self-Bias in Self-Refinement [75.7148545929689]
Large language models (LLMs) improve their performance through self-feedback on certain tasks while degrade on others.
We formally define LLM's self-bias - the tendency to favor its own generation.
We analyze six LLMs on translation, constrained text generation, and mathematical reasoning tasks.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-18T03:10:39Z) - Exploring Value Biases: How LLMs Deviate Towards the Ideal [57.99044181599786]
Large-Language-Models (LLMs) are deployed in a wide range of applications, and their response has an increasing social impact.
We show that value bias is strong in LLMs across different categories, similar to the results found in human studies.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-02-16T18:28:43Z) - 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) - 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) - Do LLMs exhibit human-like response biases? A case study in survey
design [66.1850490474361]
We investigate the extent to which large language models (LLMs) reflect human response biases, if at all.
We design a dataset and framework to evaluate whether LLMs exhibit human-like response biases in survey questionnaires.
Our comprehensive evaluation of nine models shows that popular open and commercial LLMs generally fail to reflect human-like behavior.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-11-07T15:40:43Z)
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.