Bias and Fairness in Large Language Models: A Survey

Overview

• Rapid advancements in large language models (LLMs) have enabled human-like text processing, understanding, and generation, but these models can also learn, perpetuate, and amplify harmful social biases.
• This paper presents a comprehensive survey of bias evaluation and mitigation techniques for LLMs.
• The authors consolidate, formalize, and expand notions of social bias and fairness in natural language processing, and propose taxonomies for bias evaluation metrics, datasets, and mitigation techniques.
• The goal is to provide a clear guide to the existing literature, empowering researchers and practitioners to better understand and prevent the propagation of bias in LLMs.

Plain English Explanation

Large language models (LLMs) are a type of artificial intelligence that can process, understand, and generate human-like text. These models have seen rapid advancements in recent years, and are becoming increasingly integrated into systems that touch our social sphere. However, despite their success, these models can also learn and perpetuate harmful social biases.

The research paper presented here aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the techniques used to evaluate and mitigate bias in LLMs. The authors first define and clarify the concepts of social bias and fairness in the context of natural language processing. They then propose several taxonomies, or classification systems, to help organize the existing research in this area.

One taxonomy focuses on the different metrics, or ways of measuring, bias in LLMs. These metrics can operate at different levels, such as looking at the model's word embeddings (the way it represents words), the probabilities it assigns to different outputs, or the actual text it generates.

Another taxonomy categorizes the datasets, or collections of test data, that researchers use to evaluate bias in LLMs. These datasets can be structured as counterfactual inputs or prompts, and they target different types of social harms and groups.

The third taxonomy covers the various techniques used to mitigate bias in LLMs. These methods can be applied at different stages of the model's development, such as during pre-processing of the training data, during the training process itself, or as a post-processing step.

By synthesizing this wide range of recent research, the authors aim to provide a clear guide that will help researchers and practitioners better understand and prevent the propagation of bias in LLMs. This is an important goal, as these models are becoming increasingly integrated into systems that can have a significant impact on our social sphere.

Technical Explanation

The paper presented here provides a comprehensive survey of bias evaluation and mitigation techniques for large language models (LLMs).

First, the authors consolidate, formalize, and expand notions of social bias and fairness in natural language processing. They define distinct facets of harm and introduce several desiderata to operationalize fairness for LLMs.

The paper then proposes three intuitive taxonomies: two for bias evaluation, and one for mitigation. The first taxonomy of metrics for bias evaluation disambiguates the relationship between metrics and evaluation datasets, and organizes metrics by the different levels at which they operate in a model: embeddings, probabilities, and generated text. The second taxonomy of datasets for bias evaluation categorizes datasets by their structure as counterfactual inputs or prompts, and identifies the targeted harms and social groups. The authors also release a consolidation of publicly-available datasets for improved access.

The third taxonomy of techniques for bias mitigation classifies methods by their intervention during pre-processing, in-training, intra-processing, and post-processing, with granular subcategories that elucidate research trends.

Finally, the paper identifies open problems and challenges for future work. By synthesizing a wide range of recent research, the authors aim to provide a clear guide that empowers researchers and practitioners to better understand and prevent the propagation of bias in LLMs.

Critical Analysis

The paper presents a comprehensive and well-structured survey of the current state of research on bias evaluation and mitigation in large language models (LLMs). The authors' proposed taxonomies provide a helpful framework for organizing the various approaches and techniques in this field.

One potential limitation of the research is that it focuses primarily on textual bias, and does not address the issue of multimodal bias that can arise in systems that integrate language models with other modalities such as vision and audio. The authors acknowledge this in the paper, and suggest that future work could explore fairness and bias in multimodal AI.

Additionally, the paper does not delve deeply into the specific challenges of assessing bias in mental health analysis using LLMs, which may have unique considerations compared to other domains.

Overall, the comprehensive taxonomy and survey provided in this paper serve as a valuable resource for researchers and practitioners working to understand and mitigate bias in LLMs. The authors have made a significant contribution to the field, and their work lays the groundwork for future research to address the remaining challenges in this important area.

Conclusion

This paper presents a comprehensive survey of bias evaluation and mitigation techniques for large language models (LLMs). The authors consolidate and expand the concepts of social bias and fairness in natural language processing, and propose taxonomies for bias evaluation metrics, datasets, and mitigation techniques.

By synthesizing a wide range of recent research, the authors provide a clear guide that can empower researchers and practitioners to better understand and prevent the propagation of bias in LLMs. As these models become increasingly integrated into systems that touch our social sphere, addressing the issue of bias is crucial to ensure fair and equitable outcomes.

While the paper focuses primarily on textual bias, future work could explore the challenges of assessing and mitigating bias in multimodal AI systems and mental health analysis using LLMs. Overall, this research represents an important step forward in the ongoing effort to create more ethical and responsible artificial intelligence.