Evaluation of AI Ethics Tools in Language Models: A Developers' Perspective Case Stud

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2512.15791v1
• Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2025 02:43:37 GMT
• Title: Evaluation of AI Ethics Tools in Language Models: A Developers' Perspective Case Stud
• Authors: Jhessica Silva, Diego A. B. Moreira, Gabriel O. dos Santos, Alef Ferreira, Helena Maia, Sandra Avila, Helio Pedrini,
• Abstract summary: This paper presents a methodology for evaluating AIETs in language models.<n>We selected four AIETs: Model Cards, ALTAI, FactSheets, and Harms Modeling.<n>The evaluation considered the developers' perspective on the AIETs' use and quality in helping to identify ethical considerations about their model.
• Score: 2.659655189346942
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: In Artificial Intelligence (AI), language models have gained significant importance due to the widespread adoption of systems capable of simulating realistic conversations with humans through text generation. Because of their impact on society, developing and deploying these language models must be done responsibly, with attention to their negative impacts and possible harms. In this scenario, the number of AI Ethics Tools (AIETs) publications has recently increased. These AIETs are designed to help developers, companies, governments, and other stakeholders establish trust, transparency, and responsibility with their technologies by bringing accepted values to guide AI's design, development, and use stages. However, many AIETs lack good documentation, examples of use, and proof of their effectiveness in practice. This paper presents a methodology for evaluating AIETs in language models. Our approach involved an extensive literature survey on 213 AIETs, and after applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, we selected four AIETs: Model Cards, ALTAI, FactSheets, and Harms Modeling. For evaluation, we applied AIETs to language models developed for the Portuguese language, conducting 35 hours of interviews with their developers. The evaluation considered the developers' perspective on the AIETs' use and quality in helping to identify ethical considerations about their model. The results suggest that the applied AIETs serve as a guide for formulating general ethical considerations about language models. However, we note that they do not address unique aspects of these models, such as idiomatic expressions. Additionally, these AIETs did not help to identify potential negative impacts of models for the Portuguese language.

Related papers

• CoCoNUTS: Concentrating on Content while Neglecting Uninformative Textual Styles for AI-Generated Peer Review Detection [60.52240468810558]
  We introduce CoCoNUTS, a content-oriented benchmark built upon a fine-grained dataset of AI-generated peer reviews.<n>We also develop CoCoDet, an AI review detector via a multi-task learning framework, to achieve more accurate and robust detection of AI involvement in review content.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-28T06:03:11Z)
• Trustworthy Alignment of Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Models via Reinforcement Learning [84.94709351266557]
  We focus on the trustworthiness of language models with respect to retrieval augmentation. We deem that retrieval-augmented language models have the inherent capabilities of supplying response according to both contextual and parametric knowledge. Inspired by aligning language models with human preference, we take the first step towards aligning retrieval-augmented language models to a status where it responds relying merely on the external evidence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-22T09:25:21Z)
• Generative Artificial Intelligence: A Systematic Review and Applications [7.729155237285151]
  This paper documents the systematic review and analysis of recent advancements and techniques in Generative AI. The major impact that generative AI has made to date, has been in language generation with the development of large language models. The paper ends with a discussion of Responsible AI principles, and the necessary ethical considerations for the sustainability and growth of these generative models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-17T18:03:59Z)
• Language Models: A Guide for the Perplexed [51.88841610098437]
  This tutorial aims to help narrow the gap between those who study language models and those who are intrigued and want to learn more. We offer a scientific viewpoint that focuses on questions amenable to study through experimentation. We situate language models as they are today in the context of the research that led to their development.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-29T01:19:02Z)
• On the application of Large Language Models for language teaching and assessment technology [18.735612275207853]
  We look at the potential for incorporating large language models in AI-driven language teaching and assessment systems. We find that larger language models offer improvements over previous models in text generation. For automated grading and grammatical error correction, tasks whose progress is checked on well-known benchmarks, early investigations indicate that large language models on their own do not improve on state-of-the-art results.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-17T11:12:56Z)
• Evaluating Language Models for Mathematics through Interactions [116.67206980096513]
  We introduce CheckMate, a prototype platform for humans to interact with and evaluate large language models (LLMs) We conduct a study with CheckMate to evaluate three language models (InstructGPT, ChatGPT, and GPT-4) as assistants in proving undergraduate-level mathematics. We derive a taxonomy of human behaviours and uncover that despite a generally positive correlation, there are notable instances of divergence between correctness and perceived helpfulness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-02T17:12:25Z)
• Supporting Human-AI Collaboration in Auditing LLMs with LLMs [33.56822240549913]
  Large language models have been shown to be biased and behave irresponsibly. It is crucial to audit these language models rigorously. Existing auditing tools leverage either or both humans and AI to find failures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-19T21:59:04Z)
• Democratizing Ethical Assessment of Natural Language Generation Models [0.0]
  Natural language generation models are computer systems that generate coherent language when prompted with a sequence of words as context. Despite their ubiquity and many beneficial applications, language generation models also have the potential to inflict social harms. Ethical assessment of these models is therefore critical. This article introduces a new tool to democratize and standardize ethical assessment of natural language generation models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-30T12:20:31Z)
• Estimating the Personality of White-Box Language Models [0.589889361990138]
  Large-scale language models, which are trained on large corpora of text, are being used in a wide range of applications everywhere. Existing research shows that these models can and do capture human biases. Many of these biases, especially those that could potentially cause harm, are being well-investigated. However, studies that infer and change human personality traits inherited by these models have been scarce or non-existent.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-25T23:53:53Z)
• AES Systems Are Both Overstable And Oversensitive: Explaining Why And Proposing Defenses [66.49753193098356]
  We investigate the reason behind the surprising adversarial brittleness of scoring models. Our results indicate that autoscoring models, despite getting trained as "end-to-end" models, behave like bag-of-words models. We propose detection-based protection models that can detect oversensitivity and overstability causing samples with high accuracies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-24T03:49:38Z)
• Ethical-Advice Taker: Do Language Models Understand Natural Language Interventions? [62.74872383104381]
  We investigate the effectiveness of natural language interventions for reading-comprehension systems. We propose a new language understanding task, Linguistic Ethical Interventions (LEI), where the goal is to amend a question-answering (QA) model's unethical behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-02T20:57:58Z)
• Evaluation Toolkit For Robustness Testing Of Automatic Essay Scoring Systems [64.4896118325552]
  We evaluate the current state-of-the-art AES models using a model adversarial evaluation scheme and associated metrics. We find that AES models are highly overstable. Even heavy modifications(as much as 25%) with content unrelated to the topic of the questions do not decrease the score produced by the models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-07-14T03:49:43Z)

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.