Analyzing the Safety of Japanese Large Language Models in Stereotype-Triggering Prompts

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.01947v2
• Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2025 01:43:02 GMT
• Title: Analyzing the Safety of Japanese Large Language Models in Stereotype-Triggering Prompts
• Authors: Akito Nakanishi, Yukie Sano, Geng Liu, Francesco Pierri,
• Abstract summary: This study examines the safety of Japanese Large Language Models when responding to stereotype-triggering prompts in direct setups.<n>We constructed 3,612 prompts by combining 301 social group terms, categorized by age, gender, and other attributes, with 12 stereotype-inducing templates in Japanese.<n>Our findings reveal that LLM-jp, a Japanese native model, exhibits the lowest refusal rate and is more likely to generate toxic and negative responses compared to other models.
• Score: 1.222454730281256
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: In recent years, Large Language Models have attracted growing interest for their significant potential, though concerns have rapidly emerged regarding unsafe behaviors stemming from inherent stereotypes and biases. Most research on stereotypes in LLMs has primarily relied on indirect evaluation setups, in which models are prompted to select between pairs of sentences associated with particular social groups. Recently, direct evaluation methods have emerged, examining open-ended model responses to overcome limitations of previous approaches, such as annotator biases. Most existing studies have focused on English-centric LLMs, whereas research on non-English models, particularly Japanese, remains sparse, despite the growing development and adoption of these models. This study examines the safety of Japanese LLMs when responding to stereotype-triggering prompts in direct setups. We constructed 3,612 prompts by combining 301 social group terms, categorized by age, gender, and other attributes, with 12 stereotype-inducing templates in Japanese. Responses were analyzed from three foundational models trained respectively on Japanese, English, and Chinese language. Our findings reveal that LLM-jp, a Japanese native model, exhibits the lowest refusal rate and is more likely to generate toxic and negative responses compared to other models. Additionally, prompt format significantly influence the output of all models, and the generated responses include exaggerated reactions toward specific social groups, varying across models. These findings underscore the insufficient ethical safety mechanisms in Japanese LLMs and demonstrate that even high-accuracy models can produce biased outputs when processing Japanese-language prompts. We advocate for improving safety mechanisms and bias mitigation strategies in Japanese LLMs, contributing to ongoing discussions on AI ethics beyond linguistic boundaries.

Related papers

• Benchmarking Adversarial Robustness to Bias Elicitation in Large Language Models: Scalable Automated Assessment with LLM-as-a-Judge [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized artificial intelligence, driving advancements in machine translation, summarization, and conversational agents. Recent studies indicate that LLMs remain vulnerable to adversarial attacks designed to elicit biased responses. This work proposes a scalable benchmarking framework to evaluate LLM robustness against adversarial bias elicitation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-10T16:00:59Z)
• Assessing Large Language Models in Agentic Multilingual National Bias [31.67058518564021]
  Cross-language disparities in reasoning-based recommendations remain largely unexplored.<n>This study is the first to address this gap.<n>We investigate multilingual bias in state-of-the-art LLMs by analyzing their responses to decision-making tasks across multiple languages.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-25T08:07:42Z)
• Spoken Stereoset: On Evaluating Social Bias Toward Speaker in Speech Large Language Models [50.40276881893513]
  This study introduces Spoken Stereoset, a dataset specifically designed to evaluate social biases in Speech Large Language Models (SLLMs) By examining how different models respond to speech from diverse demographic groups, we aim to identify these biases. The findings indicate that while most models show minimal bias, some still exhibit slightly stereotypical or anti-stereotypical tendencies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-14T16:55:06Z)
• MOSSBench: Is Your Multimodal Language Model Oversensitive to Safe Queries? [70.77691645678804]
  Humans are prone to cognitive distortions -- biased thinking patterns that lead to exaggerated responses to specific stimuli. This paper demonstrates that advanced Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) exhibit similar tendencies. We identify three types of stimuli that trigger the oversensitivity of existing MLLMs: Exaggerated Risk, Negated Harm, and Counterintuitive.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-22T23:26:07Z)
• Analyzing Social Biases in Japanese Large Language Models [24.351580958043595]
  We construct the Japanese Bias Benchmark dataset for Question Answering (JBBQ) based on the English bias benchmark BBQ. We analyze social biases in Japanese Large Language Models (LLMs) prompts with warnings about social biases and Chain-of-Thought prompting reduce the effect of biases in model outputs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-04T07:31:06Z)
• 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)
• Social Bias Probing: Fairness Benchmarking for Language Models [38.180696489079985]
  This paper proposes a novel framework for probing language models for social biases by assessing disparate treatment. We curate SoFa, a large-scale benchmark designed to address the limitations of existing fairness collections. We show that biases within language models are more nuanced than acknowledged, indicating a broader scope of encoded biases than previously recognized.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-15T16:35:59Z)
• Generative Language Models Exhibit Social Identity Biases [17.307292780517653]
  We investigate whether ingroup solidarity and outgroup hostility, fundamental social identity biases, are present in 56 large language models. We find that almost all foundational language models and some instruction fine-tuned models exhibit clear ingroup-positive and outgroup-negative associations when prompted to complete sentences. Our findings suggest that modern language models exhibit fundamental social identity biases to a similar degree as humans.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-24T13:17:40Z)
• 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)
• On The Role of Reasoning in the Identification of Subtle Stereotypes in Natural Language [0.03749861135832073]
  Large language models (LLMs) are trained on vast, uncurated datasets that contain various forms of biases and language reinforcing harmful stereotypes. It is essential to examine and address biases in language models, integrating fairness into their development to ensure that these models do not perpetuate social biases. This work firmly establishes reasoning as a critical component in automatic stereotype detection and is a first step towards stronger stereotype mitigation pipelines for LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-24T15:12:13Z)
• Language models are not naysayers: An analysis of language models on negation benchmarks [58.32362243122714]
  We evaluate the ability of current-generation auto-regressive language models to handle negation. We show that LLMs have several limitations including insensitivity to the presence of negation, an inability to capture the lexical semantics of negation, and a failure to reason under negation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-14T01:16:37Z)
• Towards Understanding and Mitigating Social Biases in Language Models [107.82654101403264]
  Large-scale pretrained language models (LMs) can be potentially dangerous in manifesting undesirable representational biases. We propose steps towards mitigating social biases during text generation. Our empirical results and human evaluation demonstrate effectiveness in mitigating bias while retaining crucial contextual information.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-24T17:52:43Z)

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.