Interpreting Bias in Large Language Models: A Feature-Based Approach
2406.12347
0
0
Abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) such as Mistral and LLaMA have showcased remarkable performance across various natural language processing (NLP) tasks. Despite their success, these models inherit social biases from the diverse datasets on which they are trained. This paper investigates the propagation of biases within LLMs through a novel feature-based analytical approach. Drawing inspiration from causal mediation analysis, we hypothesize the evolution of bias-related features and validate them using interpretability techniques like activation and attribution patching. Our contributions are threefold: (1) We introduce and empirically validate a feature-based method for bias analysis in LLMs, applied to LLaMA-2-7B, LLaMA-3-8B, and Mistral-7B-v0.3 with templates from a professions dataset. (2) We extend our method to another form of gender bias, demonstrating its generalizability. (3) We differentiate the roles of MLPs and attention heads in bias propagation and implement targeted debiasing using a counterfactual dataset. Our findings reveal the complex nature of bias in LLMs and emphasize the necessity for tailored debiasing strategies, offering a deeper understanding of bias mechanisms and pathways for effective mitigation.
Create account to get full access
Related Work
Interpreting Bias in Large Language Models: A Feature-Based Approach
Researchers have been exploring ways to understand and mitigate bias in large language models (LLMs), which can have significant impacts in domains like mental health analysis, clinical decision support, and political discourse. Some approaches have focused on model adaptation techniques to reduce bias, while others have looked at attributing and understanding the sources of bias in these complex models.
Overview
- The paper proposes a feature-based approach to interpret bias in large language models.
- It introduces a new bias interpretation framework that can identify biased features in model outputs.
- The framework is evaluated on two popular models, GPT-2 and BERT, across several bias benchmarks.
Plain English Explanation
This research aims to better understand the biases present in large language models, which are powerful AI systems that can generate human-like text. The researchers developed a new method to identify the specific features or characteristics in the model's outputs that are associated with biased behavior.
By analyzing the models' responses to various test scenarios, the researchers were able to pinpoint the particular aspects of the language that reflect biases, such as stereotypes or prejudices. This provides a more granular understanding of how these models can exhibit biases, which is an important step towards addressing and mitigating these issues.
The researchers applied their bias interpretation framework to two widely used language models, GPT-2 and BERT, and evaluated the results across several established bias benchmarks. This allowed them to gain insights into the types of biases present in these influential AI systems.
Technical Explanation
The paper introduces a feature-based approach to interpret biases in large language models. The key components of the framework include:
- Feature Extraction: The model's outputs are analyzed to extract relevant linguistic features, such as sentiment, sentiment intensity, and named entities.
- Bias Measurement: The extracted features are used to quantify the degree of bias in the model's outputs for different test scenarios.
- Bias Attribution: The framework identifies the specific features that contribute the most to the observed biases, providing interpretable insights.
The researchers evaluated their approach on GPT-2 and BERT, two prominent language models, using established bias benchmarks. By analyzing the models' responses to these test scenarios, they were able to pinpoint the linguistic features that were associated with biased behavior.
The results provide a more granular understanding of the biases present in these language models, which can inform ongoing efforts to mitigate bias and improve the fairness and reliability of these powerful AI systems.
Critical Analysis
The paper presents a compelling approach to interpreting bias in large language models, but it also acknowledges several limitations and areas for further research:
- The bias interpretation framework relies on the accuracy of the feature extraction process, which could be imperfect or biased itself.
- The benchmarks used to evaluate the models may not capture the full spectrum of real-world biases, and their relevance to specific applications may vary.
- The approach focuses on interpreting biases but does not directly address the challenge of debiasing or mitigating these issues in the models.
Future research could explore ways to improve the feature extraction and bias measurement processes, expand the set of bias benchmarks, and develop more comprehensive strategies for addressing biases in large language models.
Conclusion
This research presents a novel feature-based approach to interpret biases in large language models, providing a more granular understanding of the specific linguistic characteristics that contribute to biased behaviors. By applying this framework to GPT-2 and BERT, the authors have gained valuable insights into the types of biases present in these influential AI systems.
While the paper acknowledges some limitations, the proposed bias interpretation method represents an important step forward in the ongoing efforts to understand and mitigate biases in large language models. As these models become increasingly prevalent in various applications, addressing these biases is crucial to ensure the fairness and reliability of their outputs.
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
Unveiling and Mitigating Bias in Mental Health Analysis with Large Language Models
Yuqing Wang, Yun Zhao, Sara Alessandra Keller, Anne de Hond, Marieke M. van Buchem, Malvika Pillai, Tina Hernandez-Boussard
0
0
The advancement of large language models (LLMs) has demonstrated strong capabilities across various applications, including mental health analysis. However, existing studies have focused on predictive performance, leaving the critical issue of fairness underexplored, posing significant risks to vulnerable populations. Despite acknowledging potential biases, previous works have lacked thorough investigations into these biases and their impacts. To address this gap, we systematically evaluate biases across seven social factors (e.g., gender, age, religion) using ten LLMs with different prompting methods on eight diverse mental health datasets. Our results show that GPT-4 achieves the best overall balance in performance and fairness among LLMs, although it still lags behind domain-specific models like MentalRoBERTa in some cases. Additionally, our tailored fairness-aware prompts can effectively mitigate bias in mental health predictions, highlighting the great potential for fair analysis in this field.
6/21/2024
🌀
Bias patterns in the application of LLMs for clinical decision support: A comprehensive study
Raphael Poulain, Hamed Fayyaz, Rahmatollah Beheshti
0
0
Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as powerful candidates to inform clinical decision-making processes. While these models play an increasingly prominent role in shaping the digital landscape, two growing concerns emerge in healthcare applications: 1) to what extent do LLMs exhibit social bias based on patients' protected attributes (like race), and 2) how do design choices (like architecture design and prompting strategies) influence the observed biases? To answer these questions rigorously, we evaluated eight popular LLMs across three question-answering (QA) datasets using clinical vignettes (patient descriptions) standardized for bias evaluations. We employ red-teaming strategies to analyze how demographics affect LLM outputs, comparing both general-purpose and clinically-trained models. Our extensive experiments reveal various disparities (some significant) across protected groups. We also observe several counter-intuitive patterns such as larger models not being necessarily less biased and fined-tuned models on medical data not being necessarily better than the general-purpose models. Furthermore, our study demonstrates the impact of prompt design on bias patterns and shows that specific phrasing can influence bias patterns and reflection-type approaches (like Chain of Thought) can reduce biased outcomes effectively. Consistent with prior studies, we call on additional evaluations, scrutiny, and enhancement of LLMs used in clinical decision support applications.
4/24/2024
Evaluating Implicit Bias in Large Language Models by Attacking From a Psychometric Perspective
Yuchen Wen, Keping Bi, Wei Chen, Jiafeng Guo, Xueqi Cheng
0
0
As Large Language Models (LLMs) become an important way of information seeking, there have been increasing concerns about the unethical content LLMs may generate. In this paper, we conduct a rigorous evaluation of LLMs' implicit bias towards certain groups by attacking them with carefully crafted instructions to elicit biased responses. Our attack methodology is inspired by psychometric principles in cognitive and social psychology. We propose three attack approaches, i.e., Disguise, Deception, and Teaching, based on which we built evaluation datasets for four common bias types. Each prompt attack has bilingual versions. Extensive evaluation of representative LLMs shows that 1) all three attack methods work effectively, especially the Deception attacks; 2) GLM-3 performs the best in defending our attacks, compared to GPT-3.5 and GPT-4; 3) LLMs could output content of other bias types when being taught with one type of bias. Our methodology provides a rigorous and effective way of evaluating LLMs' implicit bias and will benefit the assessments of LLMs' potential ethical risks.
6/21/2024
💬
Large Language Models are Biased Because They Are Large Language Models
Philip Resnik
0
0
This paper's primary goal is to provoke thoughtful discussion about the relationship between bias and fundamental properties of large language models. We do this by seeking to convince the reader that harmful biases are an inevitable consequence arising from the design of any large language model as LLMs are currently formulated. To the extent that this is true, it suggests that the problem of harmful bias cannot be properly addressed without a serious reconsideration of AI driven by LLMs, going back to the foundational assumptions underlying their design.
6/21/2024