REFER: Mitigating Bias in Opinion Summarisation via Frequency Framed Prompting

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.15723v1
• Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2025 07:53:51 GMT
• Title: REFER: Mitigating Bias in Opinion Summarisation via Frequency Framed Prompting
• Authors: Nannan Huang, Haytham M. Fayek, Xiuzhen Zhang,
• Abstract summary: This study investigates whether frequency framed prompting (REFER) can similarly enhance fairness in opinion summarisation.<n>We adapted techniques known to improve human reasoning to elicit more effective information processing in language models.<n>Our results demonstrate that REFER enhances fairness in language models when summarising opinions.
• Score: 4.829365136759453
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Individuals express diverse opinions, a fair summary should represent these viewpoints comprehensively. Previous research on fairness in opinion summarisation using large language models (LLMs) relied on hyperparameter tuning or providing ground truth distributional information in prompts. However, these methods face practical limitations: end-users rarely modify default model parameters, and accurate distributional information is often unavailable. Building upon cognitive science research demonstrating that frequency-based representations reduce systematic biases in human statistical reasoning by making reference classes explicit and reducing cognitive load, this study investigates whether frequency framed prompting (REFER) can similarly enhance fairness in LLM opinion summarisation. Through systematic experimentation with different prompting frameworks, we adapted techniques known to improve human reasoning to elicit more effective information processing in language models compared to abstract probabilistic representations.Our results demonstrate that REFER enhances fairness in language models when summarising opinions. This effect is particularly pronounced in larger language models and using stronger reasoning instructions.

Related papers

• REFLEX: Self-Refining Explainable Fact-Checking via Disentangling Truth into Style and Substance [14.932352020762991]
  We propose REason-guided Fact-checking with Latent EXplanations REFLEX paradigm.<n>It is a plug-and-play, self-refining paradigm that leverages the internal knowledge in backbone model to improve both verdict accuracy and explanation quality.<n>With only 465 self-refined training samples, RELFEX achieves state-of-the-art performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-25T12:06:23Z)
• Silenced Biases: The Dark Side LLMs Learned to Refuse [5.2630646053506345]
  We introduce the concept of silenced biases, which are unfair preferences encoded within models' latent space.<n>We propose the Silenced Bias Benchmark (SBB), which aims to uncover these biases by employing activation steering.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-05T11:24:50Z)
• A Closer Look at Bias and Chain-of-Thought Faithfulness of Large (Vision) Language Models [53.18562650350898]
  Chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning enhances performance of large language models.<n>We present the first comprehensive study of CoT faithfulness in large vision-language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-29T18:55:05Z)
• Actions Speak Louder than Words: Agent Decisions Reveal Implicit Biases in Language Models [10.565316815513235]
  Large language models (LLMs) may still exhibit implicit biases when simulating human behavior.<n>We show that state-of-the-art LLMs exhibit significant sociodemographic disparities in nearly all simulations.<n>When comparing our findings to real-world disparities reported in empirical studies, we find that the biases we uncovered are directionally aligned but markedly amplified.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-29T05:21:31Z)
• Covert Bias: The Severity of Social Views' Unalignment in Language Models Towards Implicit and Explicit Opinion [0.40964539027092917]
  We evaluate the severity of bias toward a view by using a biased model in edge cases of excessive bias scenarios. Our findings reveal a discrepancy in LLM performance in identifying implicit and explicit opinions, with a general tendency of bias toward explicit opinions of opposing stances. The direct, incautious responses of the unaligned models suggest a need for further refinement of decisiveness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-15T15:23:00Z)
• Identifying and Mitigating Social Bias Knowledge in Language Models [52.52955281662332]
  We propose a novel debiasing approach, Fairness Stamp (FAST), which enables fine-grained calibration of individual social biases.<n>FAST surpasses state-of-the-art baselines with superior debiasing performance.<n>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)
• A Normative Framework for Benchmarking Consumer Fairness in Large Language Model Recommender System [9.470545149911072]
  This paper proposes a normative framework to benchmark consumer fairness in LLM-powered recommender systems. We argue that this gap can lead to arbitrary conclusions about fairness. Experiments on the MovieLens dataset on consumer fairness reveal fairness deviations in age-based recommendations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-03T16:25:27Z)
• Take Care of Your Prompt Bias! Investigating and Mitigating Prompt Bias in Factual Knowledge Extraction [56.17020601803071]
  Recent research shows that pre-trained language models (PLMs) suffer from "prompt bias" in factual knowledge extraction. This paper aims to improve the reliability of existing benchmarks by thoroughly investigating and mitigating prompt bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-15T02:04:35Z)
• Decoding News Narratives: A Critical Analysis of Large Language Models in Framing Detection [10.301985230669684]
  This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of GPT-4, GPT-3.5 Turbo, and FLAN-T5 models in detecting framing in news headlines. We evaluated these models in various scenarios: zero-shot, few-shot with in-domain examples, cross-domain examples, and settings where models explain their predictions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-18T15:27:48Z)
• 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)
• Fairness-guided Few-shot Prompting for Large Language Models [93.05624064699965]
  In-context learning can suffer from high instability due to variations in training examples, example order, and prompt formats. We introduce a metric to evaluate the predictive bias of a fixed prompt against labels or a given attributes. We propose a novel search strategy based on the greedy search to identify the near-optimal prompt for improving the performance of in-context learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-23T12:28:25Z)
• Learning Informative Representation for Fairness-aware Multivariate Time-series Forecasting: A Group-based Perspective [50.093280002375984]
  Performance unfairness among variables widely exists in multivariate time series (MTS) forecasting models. We propose a novel framework, named FairFor, for fairness-aware MTS forecasting.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-27T04:54:12Z)

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.