LIBRA: Measuring Bias of Large Language Model from a Local Context

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.01679v1
• Date: Sun, 02 Feb 2025 04:24:57 GMT
• Title: LIBRA: Measuring Bias of Large Language Model from a Local Context
• Authors: Bo Pang, Tingrui Qiao, Caroline Walker, Chris Cunningham, Yun Sing Koh,
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) have significantly advanced natural language processing applications. Yet their widespread use raises concerns regarding inherent biases that may reduce utility or harm for particular social groups. This research addresses these limitations with a Local Integrated Bias Recognition and Assessment Framework (LIBRA) for measuring bias.
• Score: 9.612845616659776
• License:
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have significantly advanced natural language processing applications, yet their widespread use raises concerns regarding inherent biases that may reduce utility or harm for particular social groups. Despite the advancement in addressing LLM bias, existing research has two major limitations. First, existing LLM bias evaluation focuses on the U.S. cultural context, making it challenging to reveal stereotypical biases of LLMs toward other cultures, leading to unfair development and use of LLMs. Second, current bias evaluation often assumes models are familiar with the target social groups. When LLMs encounter words beyond their knowledge boundaries that are unfamiliar in their training data, they produce irrelevant results in the local context due to hallucinations and overconfidence, which are not necessarily indicative of inherent bias. This research addresses these limitations with a Local Integrated Bias Recognition and Assessment Framework (LIBRA) for measuring bias using datasets sourced from local corpora without crowdsourcing. Implementing this framework, we develop a dataset comprising over 360,000 test cases in the New Zealand context. Furthermore, we propose the Enhanced Idealized CAT Score (EiCAT), integrating the iCAT score with a beyond knowledge boundary score (bbs) and a distribution divergence-based bias measurement to tackle the challenge of LLMs encountering words beyond knowledge boundaries. Our results show that the BERT family, GPT-2, and Llama-3 models seldom understand local words in different contexts. While Llama-3 exhibits larger bias, it responds better to different cultural contexts. The code and dataset are available at: https://github.com/ipangbo/LIBRA.

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)
• Promoting Equality in Large Language Models: Identifying and Mitigating the Implicit Bias based on Bayesian Theory [29.201402717025335]
  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.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-20T07:40:12Z)
• BiasDPO: Mitigating Bias in Language Models through Direct Preference Optimization [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have become pivotal in advancing natural language processing, yet their potential to perpetuate biases poses significant concerns. This paper introduces a new framework employing Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) to mitigate gender, racial, and religious biases in English text. By developing a loss function that favors less biased over biased completions, our approach cultivates a preference for respectful and non-discriminatory language.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-18T22:32:20Z)
• CEB: Compositional Evaluation Benchmark for Fairness in Large Language Models [58.57987316300529]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed to handle various natural language processing (NLP) tasks. To evaluate the biases exhibited by LLMs, researchers have recently proposed a variety of datasets. We propose CEB, a Compositional Evaluation Benchmark that covers different types of bias across different social groups and tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-02T16:31:37Z)
• Evaluating Implicit Bias in Large Language Models by Attacking From a Psychometric Perspective [66.34066553400108]
  We conduct a rigorous evaluation of large language models' implicit bias towards certain demographics. Inspired by psychometric principles, we propose three attack approaches, i.e., Disguise, Deception, and Teaching. Our methods can elicit LLMs' inner bias more effectively than competitive baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T06:42:08Z)
• White Men Lead, Black Women Help? Benchmarking Language Agency Social Biases in LLMs [58.27353205269664]
  Social biases can manifest in language agency. We introduce the novel Language Agency Bias Evaluation benchmark. We unveil language agency social biases in 3 recent Large Language Model (LLM)-generated content.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-16T12:27:54Z)
• LLMs' Reading Comprehension Is Affected by Parametric Knowledge and Struggles with Hypothetical Statements [59.71218039095155]
  Task of reading comprehension (RC) provides a primary means to assess language models' natural language understanding (NLU) capabilities. If the context aligns with the models' internal knowledge, it is hard to discern whether the models' answers stem from context comprehension or from internal information. To address this issue, we suggest to use RC on imaginary data, based on fictitious facts and entities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-09T13:08:56Z)
• 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)
• Confronting LLMs with Traditional ML: Rethinking the Fairness of Large Language Models in Tabular Classifications [23.963586791210414]
  We show that large language models (LLMs) tend to inherit social biases from their training data which significantly impact their fairness in classification tasks. This observation emphasizes that the social biases are inherent within the LLMs themselves and inherited from their pretraining corpus.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-23T06:31:28Z)
• Bias and Fairness in Large Language Models: A Survey [73.87651986156006]
  We present a comprehensive survey of bias evaluation and mitigation techniques for large language models (LLMs) We first consolidate, formalize, and expand notions of social bias and fairness in natural language processing. We then unify the literature by proposing three intuitive, two for bias evaluation, and one for mitigation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-02T00:32:55Z)
• Language-Agnostic Bias Detection in Language Models with Bias Probing [22.695872707061078]
  Pretrained language models (PLMs) are key components in NLP, but they contain strong social biases. We propose a bias probing technique called LABDet for evaluating social bias in PLMs with a robust and language-agnostic method. We find consistent patterns of nationality bias across monolingual PLMs in six languages that align with historical and political context.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-22T17:58:01Z)

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.