Measuring and Addressing Indexical Bias in Information Retrieval
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- This paper explores the problem of indexical bias in information retrieval systems, which refers to the tendency of these systems to favor certain types of content or users over others.
- The researchers propose methods to measure and mitigate this bias, with the goal of improving the fairness and inclusiveness of information retrieval.
- Key areas covered include measuring and addressing indexical bias in information retrieval, accessibility in information retrieval, and language fairness in multilingual information retrieval.
Plain English Explanation
Information retrieval systems, like search engines, are designed to find and rank the most relevant information for a given query. However, these systems can sometimes exhibit biases, favoring certain types of content or users over others. This is known as "indexical bias."
For example, a search engine might return more results from certain geographical regions or in certain languages, even if those results aren't the most relevant for the user's query. Or the system might prioritize content created by certain demographic groups, inadvertently excluding other groups.
The researchers in this paper wanted to understand and address this problem. They developed methods to measure indexical bias in information retrieval systems, and then explored ways to mitigate this bias and make the systems more fair and inclusive.
This is important because information retrieval systems play a crucial role in how we access and use information in the digital age. If these systems are biased, they can reinforce or even amplify existing social and cultural inequalities. By addressing indexical bias, the researchers aim to create more accessible and equitable information retrieval systems that better serve the diverse needs of all users.
Technical Explanation
The paper begins by defining the concept of indexical bias, which refers to the tendency of information retrieval systems to favor certain types of content or users over others based on indexical features, such as geographic location, language, or demographic characteristics.
The researchers then present methods for measuring indexical bias in information retrieval systems. This involves analyzing the distribution of relevant results across different indexical features and comparing this to an ideal, unbiased distribution. They also introduce the concept of "retrievability," which quantifies how easy it is for a particular document to be retrieved by the system.
Next, the paper explores strategies for mitigating indexical bias. One approach is to incorporate indexical features directly into the retrieval model, allowing the system to recognize and account for potential biases. The researchers also investigate ways to generate more diverse and inclusive queries to improve the fairness of multilingual information retrieval.
Finally, the paper discusses the potential limitations and challenges of addressing indexical bias, such as the difficulty of defining and measuring fairness in complex, real-world information retrieval systems.
Critical Analysis
The researchers in this paper have made a valuable contribution by highlighting the important issue of indexical bias in information retrieval. Their proposed methods for measuring and mitigating this bias are well-designed and have the potential to significantly improve the fairness and inclusiveness of these systems.
However, the authors acknowledge that fully addressing indexical bias is a complex and challenging task. Defining and quantifying fairness in information retrieval is not straightforward, and there may be inherent trade-offs between fairness and other performance metrics, such as relevance or efficiency.
Additionally, the paper focuses primarily on textual information retrieval, and it's unclear how well the proposed methods would translate to other modalities, such as image or multimodal retrieval. Further research may be needed to understand the nuances of indexical bias in these other contexts.
Overall, this paper is a thoughtful and valuable contribution to the ongoing efforts to make information retrieval systems more equitable and inclusive. While challenges remain, the researchers have outlined a promising path forward for addressing this important problem.
Conclusion
This paper presents a comprehensive study of indexical bias in information retrieval, including methods for measuring and mitigating this bias. The researchers have demonstrated the importance of addressing this issue, as indexical bias can lead to the exclusion of certain users and the reinforcement of social and cultural inequalities.
By incorporating indexical features into retrieval models and exploring ways to generate more diverse and inclusive queries, the researchers have shown how information retrieval systems can be made more fair and accessible. While challenges remain, this work represents a significant step forward in the ongoing effort to create equitable and inclusive information retrieval systems that better serve the needs of all users.
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
Measuring and Addressing Indexical Bias in Information Retrieval
Caleb Ziems, William Held, Jane Dwivedi-Yu, Diyi Yang
Information Retrieval (IR) systems are designed to deliver relevant content, but traditional systems may not optimize rankings for fairness, neutrality, or the balance of ideas. Consequently, IR can often introduce indexical biases, or biases in the positional order of documents. Although indexical bias can demonstrably affect people's opinion, voting patterns, and other behaviors, these issues remain understudied as the field lacks reliable metrics and procedures for automatically measuring indexical bias. Towards this end, we introduce the PAIR framework, which supports automatic bias audits for ranked documents or entire IR systems. After introducing DUO, the first general-purpose automatic bias metric, we run an extensive evaluation of 8 IR systems on a new corpus of 32k synthetic and 4.7k natural documents, with 4k queries spanning 1.4k controversial issue topics. A human behavioral study validates our approach, showing that our bias metric can help predict when and how indexical bias will shift a reader's opinion.
Read more6/7/2024
0
Bias and Unfairness in Information Retrieval Systems: New Challenges in the LLM Era
Sunhao Dai, Chen Xu, Shicheng Xu, Liang Pang, Zhenhua Dong, Jun Xu
With the rapid advancements of large language models (LLMs), information retrieval (IR) systems, such as search engines and recommender systems, have undergone a significant paradigm shift. This evolution, while heralding new opportunities, introduces emerging challenges, particularly in terms of biases and unfairness, which may threaten the information ecosystem. In this paper, we present a comprehensive survey of existing works on emerging and pressing bias and unfairness issues in IR systems when the integration of LLMs. We first unify bias and unfairness issues as distribution mismatch problems, providing a groundwork for categorizing various mitigation strategies through distribution alignment. Subsequently, we systematically delve into the specific bias and unfairness issues arising from three critical stages of LLMs integration into IR systems: data collection, model development, and result evaluation. In doing so, we meticulously review and analyze recent literature, focusing on the definitions, characteristics, and corresponding mitigation strategies associated with these issues. Finally, we identify and highlight some open problems and challenges for future work, aiming to inspire researchers and stakeholders in the IR field and beyond to better understand and mitigate bias and unfairness issues of IR in this LLM era. We also consistently maintain a GitHub repository for the relevant papers and resources in this rising direction at https://github.com/KID-22/LLM-IR-Bias-Fairness-Survey.
Read more8/22/2024
🧠
0
Neural Retrievers are Biased Towards LLM-Generated Content
Sunhao Dai, Yuqi Zhou, Liang Pang, Weihao Liu, Xiaolin Hu, Yong Liu, Xiao Zhang, Gang Wang, Jun Xu
Recently, the emergence of large language models (LLMs) has revolutionized the paradigm of information retrieval (IR) applications, especially in web search, by generating vast amounts of human-like texts on the Internet. As a result, IR systems in the LLM era are facing a new challenge: the indexed documents are now not only written by human beings but also automatically generated by the LLMs. How these LLM-generated documents influence the IR systems is a pressing and still unexplored question. In this work, we conduct a quantitative evaluation of IR models in scenarios where both human-written and LLM-generated texts are involved. Surprisingly, our findings indicate that neural retrieval models tend to rank LLM-generated documents higher. We refer to this category of biases in neural retrievers towards the LLM-generated content as the textbf{source bias}. Moreover, we discover that this bias is not confined to the first-stage neural retrievers, but extends to the second-stage neural re-rankers. Then, in-depth analyses from the perspective of text compression indicate that LLM-generated texts exhibit more focused semantics with less noise, making it easier for neural retrieval models to semantic match. To mitigate the source bias, we also propose a plug-and-play debiased constraint for the optimization objective, and experimental results show its effectiveness. Finally, we discuss the potential severe concerns stemming from the observed source bias and hope our findings can serve as a critical wake-up call to the IR community and beyond. To facilitate future explorations of IR in the LLM era, the constructed two new benchmarks are available at https://github.com/KID-22/Source-Bias.
Read more8/1/2024
0
Cognitively Biased Users Interacting with Algorithmically Biased Results in Whole-Session Search on Debated Topics
Ben Wang, Jiqun Liu
When interacting with information retrieval (IR) systems, users, affected by confirmation biases, tend to select search results that confirm their existing beliefs on socially significant contentious issues. To understand the judgments and attitude changes of users searching online, our study examined how cognitively biased users interact with algorithmically biased search engine result pages (SERPs). We designed three-query search sessions on debated topics under various bias conditions. We recruited 1,321 crowdsourcing participants and explored their attitude changes, search interactions, and the effects of confirmation bias. Three key findings emerged: 1) most attitude changes occur in the initial query of a search session; 2) Confirmation bias and result presentation on SERPs affect the number and depth of clicks in the current query and perceived familiarity with clicked results in subsequent queries; 3) The bias position also affects attitude changes of users with lower perceived openness to conflicting opinions. Our study goes beyond traditional simulation-based evaluation settings and simulated rational users, sheds light on the mixed effects of human biases and algorithmic biases in information retrieval tasks on debated topics, and can inform the design of bias-aware user models, human-centered bias mitigation techniques, and socially responsible intelligent IR systems.
Read more6/10/2024