AuditLLM: A Tool for Auditing Large Language Models Using Multiprobe Approach
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- This paper introduces AuditLLM, a tool for auditing large language models (LLMs) using a multiprobe approach.
- The tool aims to provide a comprehensive evaluation of LLMs by assessing their performance across a diverse set of tasks and probes.
- The authors demonstrate the functionality of AuditLLM through several use cases, highlighting its ability to uncover potential issues and biases in LLMs.
Plain English Explanation
The paper presents a new tool called AuditLLM that can be used to thoroughly evaluate and audit large language models (LLMs). LLMs are powerful AI systems that can generate human-like text, but they can also exhibit undesirable behaviors, such as biases or inaccuracies.
AuditLLM uses a "multiprobe approach" to assess the performance of LLMs across a wide range of tasks. This means that the tool doesn't just test the model's ability to perform one specific task, but rather evaluates it on a diverse set of probes or challenges. This helps uncover any potential issues or areas where the LLM may be struggling.
The authors demonstrate the use of AuditLLM through several real-world examples, showing how it can help identify biases or other problems in LLMs. For instance, the tool might reveal that a particular LLM performs poorly when asked to generate text related to certain demographic groups, indicating the presence of biases in the model.
By providing a comprehensive auditing framework, AuditLLM aims to help researchers, developers, and users of LLMs better understand the capabilities and limitations of these powerful AI systems. This can ultimately lead to the development of more robust and trustworthy language models that can be safely deployed in a variety of applications.
Technical Explanation
The paper introduces AuditLLM: A Tool for Auditing Large Language Models Using Multiprobe Approach, a framework for comprehensively evaluating the performance and behavior of large language models (LLMs).
The core idea behind AuditLLM is to use a "multiprobe" approach, where the tool assesses the LLM's capabilities across a diverse set of tasks and probes. This includes evaluating the model's performance on tasks related to text generation, language understanding, and text-based reasoning.
The authors demonstrate the functionality of AuditLLM through several use cases, showcasing how the tool can uncover potential issues and biases in LLMs. For example, they show how AuditLLM can identify disparities in the model's performance when generating text related to different demographic groups, revealing the presence of biases.
The paper also discusses the broader implications of the AuditLLM framework, highlighting its potential to aid in the development of more robust and trustworthy language models that can be safely deployed in a variety of applications.
Critical Analysis
The authors of this paper present a compelling approach to auditing large language models (LLMs) using a multiprobe framework. The key strength of AuditLLM is its ability to assess the LLM's performance across a diverse set of tasks, which helps uncover potential issues and biases that may not be evident from a single-task evaluation.
However, the paper does not provide a detailed discussion of the limitations or potential caveats of the AuditLLM approach. For example, it is unclear how the selection of probes and tasks within the framework may impact the evaluation, or how the tool's performance may vary across different LLM architectures and configurations.
Additionally, the paper could have benefited from a more in-depth discussion of the broader ethical implications of auditing LLMs, particularly in terms of ensuring the responsible development and deployment of these powerful AI systems.
Overall, the AuditLLM framework represents a significant step forward in the auditing and evaluation of large language models. However, further research and discussion are needed to fully understand the tool's capabilities, limitations, and the wider societal implications of its use.
Conclusion
The paper introduces AuditLLM, a comprehensive framework for auditing large language models (LLMs) using a multiprobe approach. By evaluating the LLM's performance across a diverse set of tasks and probes, the tool aims to uncover potential issues, biases, and limitations in these powerful AI systems.
The authors demonstrate the functionality of AuditLLM through several use cases, showcasing its ability to identify disparities in LLM performance and behavior. This highlights the importance of thorough auditing and evaluation when it comes to the development and deployment of large language models.
The AuditLLM framework represents a valuable contribution to the ongoing efforts to ensure the responsible and trustworthy use of language models in various applications. As the field of AI continues to advance, tools like AuditLLM will play a crucial role in fostering the development of more robust and accountable large language models that can be safely and ethically deployed.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
0
AuditLLM: A Tool for Auditing Large Language Models Using Multiprobe Approach
Maryam Amirizaniani, Elias Martin, Tanya Roosta, Aman Chadha, Chirag Shah
As Large Language Models (LLMs) are integrated into various sectors, ensuring their reliability and safety is crucial. This necessitates rigorous probing and auditing to maintain their effectiveness and trustworthiness in practical applications. Subjecting LLMs to varied iterations of a single query can unveil potential inconsistencies in their knowledge base or functional capacity. However, a tool for performing such audits with a easy to execute workflow, and low technical threshold is lacking. In this demo, we introduce ``AuditLLM,'' a novel tool designed to audit the performance of various LLMs in a methodical way. AuditLLM's primary function is to audit a given LLM by deploying multiple probes derived from a single question, thus detecting any inconsistencies in the model's comprehension or performance. A robust, reliable, and consistent LLM is expected to generate semantically similar responses to variably phrased versions of the same question. Building on this premise, AuditLLM generates easily interpretable results that reflect the LLM's consistency based on a single input question provided by the user. A certain level of inconsistency has been shown to be an indicator of potential bias, hallucinations, and other issues. One could then use the output of AuditLLM to further investigate issues with the aforementioned LLM. To facilitate demonstration and practical uses, AuditLLM offers two key modes: (1) Live mode which allows instant auditing of LLMs by analyzing responses to real-time queries; and (2) Batch mode which facilitates comprehensive LLM auditing by processing multiple queries at once for in-depth analysis. This tool is beneficial for both researchers and general users, as it enhances our understanding of LLMs' capabilities in generating responses, using a standardized auditing platform.
Read more6/19/2024
💬
0
LLMAuditor: A Framework for Auditing Large Language Models Using Human-in-the-Loop
Maryam Amirizaniani, Jihan Yao, Adrian Lavergne, Elizabeth Snell Okada, Aman Chadha, Tanya Roosta, Chirag Shah
As Large Language Models (LLMs) become more pervasive across various users and scenarios, identifying potential issues when using these models becomes essential. Examples of such issues include: bias, inconsistencies, and hallucination. Although auditing the LLM for these problems is often warranted, such a process is neither easy nor accessible for most. An effective method is to probe the LLM using different versions of the same question. This could expose inconsistencies in its knowledge or operation, indicating potential for bias or hallucination. However, to operationalize this auditing method at scale, we need an approach to create those probes reliably and automatically. In this paper we propose the LLMAuditor framework which is an automatic, and scalable solution, where one uses a different LLM along with human-in-the-loop (HIL). This approach offers verifiability and transparency, while avoiding circular reliance on the same LLM, and increasing scientific rigor and generalizability. Specifically, LLMAuditor includes two phases of verification using humans: standardized evaluation criteria to verify responses, and a structured prompt template to generate desired probes. A case study using questions from the TruthfulQA dataset demonstrates that we can generate a reliable set of probes from one LLM that can be used to audit inconsistencies in a different LLM. This process is enhanced by our structured prompt template with HIL, which not only boosts the reliability of our approach in auditing but also yields the delivery of less hallucinated results. The novelty of our research stems from the development of a comprehensive, general-purpose framework that includes a HIL verified prompt template for auditing responses generated by LLMs.
Read more5/24/2024
0
Auditing the Use of Language Models to Guide Hiring Decisions
Johann D. Gaebler, Sharad Goel, Aziz Huq, Prasanna Tambe
Regulatory efforts to protect against algorithmic bias have taken on increased urgency with rapid advances in large language models (LLMs), which are machine learning models that can achieve performance rivaling human experts on a wide array of tasks. A key theme of these initiatives is algorithmic auditing, but current regulations -- as well as the scientific literature -- provide little guidance on how to conduct these assessments. Here we propose and investigate one approach for auditing algorithms: correspondence experiments, a widely applied tool for detecting bias in human judgements. In the employment context, correspondence experiments aim to measure the extent to which race and gender impact decisions by experimentally manipulating elements of submitted application materials that suggest an applicant's demographic traits, such as their listed name. We apply this method to audit candidate assessments produced by several state-of-the-art LLMs, using a novel corpus of applications to K-12 teaching positions in a large public school district. We find evidence of moderate race and gender disparities, a pattern largely robust to varying the types of application material input to the models, as well as the framing of the task to the LLMs. We conclude by discussing some important limitations of correspondence experiments for auditing algorithms.
Read more4/5/2024
📶
0
Enhancing Trust in LLMs: Algorithms for Comparing and Interpreting LLMs
Nik Bear Brown
This paper surveys evaluation techniques to enhance the trustworthiness and understanding of Large Language Models (LLMs). As reliance on LLMs grows, ensuring their reliability, fairness, and transparency is crucial. We explore algorithmic methods and metrics to assess LLM performance, identify weaknesses, and guide development towards more trustworthy applications. Key evaluation metrics include Perplexity Measurement, NLP metrics (BLEU, ROUGE, METEOR, BERTScore, GLEU, Word Error Rate, Character Error Rate), Zero-Shot and Few-Shot Learning Performance, Transfer Learning Evaluation, Adversarial Testing, and Fairness and Bias Evaluation. We introduce innovative approaches like LLMMaps for stratified evaluation, Benchmarking and Leaderboards for competitive assessment, Stratified Analysis for in-depth understanding, Visualization of Blooms Taxonomy for cognitive level accuracy distribution, Hallucination Score for quantifying inaccuracies, Knowledge Stratification Strategy for hierarchical analysis, and Machine Learning Models for Hierarchy Generation. Human Evaluation is highlighted for capturing nuances that automated metrics may miss. These techniques form a framework for evaluating LLMs, aiming to enhance transparency, guide development, and establish user trust. Future papers will describe metric visualization and demonstrate each approach on practical examples.
Read more6/5/2024