Navigating the Rabbit Hole: Emergent Biases in LLM-Generated Attack Narratives Targeting Mental Health Groups

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2504.06160v3
• Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2025 20:13:11 GMT
• Title: Navigating the Rabbit Hole: Emergent Biases in LLM-Generated Attack Narratives Targeting Mental Health Groups
• Authors: Rijul Magu, Arka Dutta, Sean Kim, Ashiqur R. KhudaBukhsh, Munmun De Choudhury,
• Abstract summary: The study of unprovoked targeted attacks by Large Language Models (LLMs) towards at-risk populations remains underexplored.<n>Our paper presents three novel contributions: (1) the explicit evaluation of LLM-generated attacks on highly vulnerable mental health groups; (2) a network-based framework to study the propagation of relative biases; and (3) an assessment of the relative degree of stigmatization that emerges from these attacks.
• Score: 20.07782545235038
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have been shown to demonstrate imbalanced biases against certain groups. However, the study of unprovoked targeted attacks by LLMs towards at-risk populations remains underexplored. Our paper presents three novel contributions: (1) the explicit evaluation of LLM-generated attacks on highly vulnerable mental health groups; (2) a network-based framework to study the propagation of relative biases; and (3) an assessment of the relative degree of stigmatization that emerges from these attacks. Our analysis of a recently released large-scale bias audit dataset reveals that mental health entities occupy central positions within attack narrative networks, as revealed by a significantly higher mean centrality of closeness (p-value = 4.06e-10) and dense clustering (Gini coefficient = 0.7). Drawing from sociological foundations of stigmatization theory, our stigmatization analysis indicates increased labeling components for mental health disorder-related targets relative to initial targets in generation chains. Taken together, these insights shed light on the structural predilections of large language models to heighten harmful discourse and highlight the need for suitable approaches for mitigation.

Related papers

• Fairness Mediator: Neutralize Stereotype Associations to Mitigate Bias in Large Language Models [66.5536396328527]
  LLMs inadvertently absorb spurious correlations from training data, leading to stereotype associations between biased concepts and specific social groups. We propose Fairness Mediator (FairMed), a bias mitigation framework that neutralizes stereotype associations. Our framework comprises two main components: a stereotype association prober and an adversarial debiasing neutralizer.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-10T14:23:06Z)
• Metacognitive Myopia in Large Language Models [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit potentially harmful biases that reinforce culturally inherent stereotypes, cloud moral judgments, or amplify positive evaluations of majority groups. We propose metacognitive myopia as a cognitive-ecological framework that can account for a conglomerate of established and emerging LLM biases. Our theoretical framework posits that a lack of the two components of metacognition, monitoring and control, causes five symptoms of metacognitive myopia in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-10T14:43:57Z)
• 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.<n>Inspired by psychometric principles, we propose three attack approaches, i.e., Disguise, Deception, and Teaching.<n>Our methods can elicit LLMs' inner bias more effectively than competitive baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-20T06:42:08Z)
• Cross-Care: Assessing the Healthcare Implications of Pre-training Data on Language Model Bias [3.455189439319919]
  We introduce Cross-Care, the first benchmark framework dedicated to assessing biases and real world knowledge in large language models (LLMs) We evaluate how demographic biases embedded in pre-training corpora like $ThePile$ influence the outputs of LLMs. Our results highlight substantial misalignment between LLM representation of disease prevalence and real disease prevalence rates across demographic subgroups.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-09T02:33:14Z)
• Hidden in Plain Sight: Undetectable Adversarial Bias Attacks on Vulnerable Patient Populations [3.5984704795350315]
  We show that demographically targeted label poisoning attacks can introduce undetectable underdiagnosis bias in deep learning (DL) models. Our results indicate that adversarial bias attacks result in biased DL models that propagate prediction bias even when evaluated with external datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-08T14:40:32Z)
• 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)
• Visual Adversarial Examples Jailbreak Aligned Large Language Models [66.53468356460365]
  We show that the continuous and high-dimensional nature of the visual input makes it a weak link against adversarial attacks. We exploit visual adversarial examples to circumvent the safety guardrail of aligned LLMs with integrated vision. Our study underscores the escalating adversarial risks associated with the pursuit of multimodality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-22T22:13:03Z)
• Bias Against 93 Stigmatized Groups in Masked Language Models and Downstream Sentiment Classification Tasks [2.5690340428649323]
  This study extends the focus of bias evaluation in extant work by examining bias against social stigmas on a large scale. It focuses on 93 stigmatized groups in the United States, including a wide range of conditions related to disease, disability, drug use, mental illness, religion, sexuality, socioeconomic status, and other relevant factors. We investigate bias against these groups in English pre-trained Masked Language Models (MLMs) and their downstream sentiment classification tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-08T20:46:09Z)
• Auditing Algorithmic Fairness in Machine Learning for Health with Severity-Based LOGAN [70.76142503046782]
  We propose supplementing machine learning-based (ML) healthcare tools for bias with SLOGAN, an automatic tool for capturing local biases in a clinical prediction task. LOGAN adapts an existing tool, LOcal Group biAs detectioN, by contextualizing group bias detection in patient illness severity and past medical history. On average, SLOGAN identifies larger fairness disparities in over 75% of patient groups than LOGAN while maintaining clustering quality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-16T08:04:12Z)
• Predictive Modeling of ICU Healthcare-Associated Infections from Imbalanced Data. Using Ensembles and a Clustering-Based Undersampling Approach [55.41644538483948]
  This work is focused on both the identification of risk factors and the prediction of healthcare-associated infections in intensive-care units. The aim is to support decision making addressed at reducing the incidence rate of infections.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-07T16:13:12Z)

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.