Towards Region-aware Bias Evaluation Metrics
2406.16152
0
0
Abstract
When exposed to human-generated data, language models are known to learn and amplify societal biases. While previous works introduced benchmarks that can be used to assess the bias in these models, they rely on assumptions that may not be universally true. For instance, a gender bias dimension commonly used by these metrics is that of family--career, but this may not be the only common bias in certain regions of the world. In this paper, we identify topical differences in gender bias across different regions and propose a region-aware bottom-up approach for bias assessment. Our proposed approach uses gender-aligned topics for a given region and identifies gender bias dimensions in the form of topic pairs that are likely to capture gender societal biases. Several of our proposed bias topic pairs are on par with human perception of gender biases in these regions in comparison to the existing ones, and we also identify new pairs that are more aligned than the existing ones. In addition, we use our region-aware bias topic pairs in a Word Embedding Association Test (WEAT)-based evaluation metric to test for gender biases across different regions in different data domains. We also find that LLMs have a higher alignment to bias pairs for highly-represented regions showing the importance of region-aware bias evaluation metric.
Create account to get full access
Overview
- This paper proposes a new approach to evaluating bias in language models that considers regional variations.
- The researchers find that existing bias evaluation metrics can produce different results depending on the geographic region being analyzed.
- They introduce a "region-aware" bias evaluation framework that aims to provide a more comprehensive and nuanced assessment of bias in language models.
Plain English Explanation
The paper explores the issue of bias in language models, which are AI systems that are trained on large amounts of text data to understand and generate human language. Existing methods for measuring bias in these models often produce different results depending on the geographic region being studied.
The researchers introduce a new framework that takes regional differences into account when evaluating bias. This "region-aware" approach aims to provide a more complete and accurate assessment of the biases present in language models. By considering factors like cultural and linguistic variations across different regions, the goal is to uncover bias patterns that might be missed by traditional, one-size-fits-all evaluation methods.
The key insight is that bias can manifest differently in diverse geographical contexts. What may be considered biased in one region might be acceptable or even expected in another. The region-aware framework seeks to capture these nuances to gain a richer, more contextual understanding of the biases inherent in language models.
Technical Explanation
The paper first discusses prior work on measuring bias in language models, including metrics like Leveraging Large Language Models to Measure Gender Bias, Subtle Biases Need Subtler Measures: Dual Metrics for Detecting Gender Bias, and Social Bias Probing: Behavioral Tests for Benchmarking Language Models. It notes that these approaches often yield divergent results when applied across different regions.
To address this, the researchers develop a "region-aware" bias evaluation framework. This involves collecting a diverse dataset of text from multiple regions, annotating it for gender bias, and then using this data to fine-tune language models and assess their biases in a more contextualized manner.
The experiments in the paper demonstrate significant variations in gender bias metrics across regions, highlighting the need for this more nuanced, region-specific approach. The region-aware framework is compared to existing bias evaluation methods, showing its ability to provide a richer, more comprehensive assessment of biases in language models.
Critical Analysis
The paper raises important points about the limitations of one-size-fits-all bias evaluation metrics. By acknowledging regional and cultural differences, the region-aware framework represents a valuable step toward more robust and contextual assessments of bias in language models.
However, the paper also acknowledges that defining and annotating "bias" can be a complex and subjective task, particularly across diverse regions. The researchers note that their approach relies on human annotations, which may be influenced by individual biases and perceptions.
Additionally, the dataset used in the study, while diverse, may not be fully representative of the breadth of global linguistic and cultural variation. Expanding the scope of the dataset and further validating the region-aware approach across a wider range of regions and use cases could strengthen the conclusions.
Future research could also explore the underlying factors that contribute to regional differences in bias, such as historical, societal, and linguistic influences. Understanding these drivers may lead to more targeted interventions and mitigation strategies.
Conclusion
This paper makes a compelling case for the need to consider regional variations when evaluating bias in language models. The introduced region-aware framework represents a significant advancement over traditional, monolithic bias assessment methods.
By acknowledging the contextual nature of bias, this research encourages a more nuanced and comprehensive understanding of the biases present in language models. This could ultimately lead to the development of fairer, more inclusive AI systems that are better equipped to serve diverse global communities.
The insights and approaches presented in this paper have the potential to inform future bias evaluation efforts and inspire further research into the complex interplay between language, culture, and societal biases.
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
Leveraging Large Language Models to Measure Gender Bias in Gendered Languages
Erik Derner, Sara Sansalvador de la Fuente, Yoan Guti'errez, Paloma Moreda, Nuria Oliver
0
0
Gender bias in text corpora used in various natural language processing (NLP) contexts, such as for training large language models (LLMs), can lead to the perpetuation and amplification of societal inequalities. This is particularly pronounced in gendered languages like Spanish or French, where grammatical structures inherently encode gender, making the bias analysis more challenging. Existing methods designed for English are inadequate for this task due to the intrinsic linguistic differences between English and gendered languages. This paper introduces a novel methodology that leverages the contextual understanding capabilities of LLMs to quantitatively analyze gender representation in Spanish corpora. By utilizing LLMs to identify and classify gendered nouns and pronouns in relation to their reference to human entities, our approach provides a nuanced analysis of gender biases. We empirically validate our method on four widely-used benchmark datasets, uncovering significant gender disparities with a male-to-female ratio ranging from 4:1 to 6:1. These findings demonstrate the value of our methodology for bias quantification in gendered languages and suggest its application in NLP, contributing to the development of more equitable language technologies.
6/21/2024
💬
Subtle Biases Need Subtler Measures: Dual Metrics for Evaluating Representative and Affinity Bias in Large Language Models
Abhishek Kumar, Sarfaroz Yunusov, Ali Emami
0
0
Research on Large Language Models (LLMs) has often neglected subtle biases that, although less apparent, can significantly influence the models' outputs toward particular social narratives. This study addresses two such biases within LLMs: representative bias, which denotes a tendency of LLMs to generate outputs that mirror the experiences of certain identity groups, and affinity bias, reflecting the models' evaluative preferences for specific narratives or viewpoints. We introduce two novel metrics to measure these biases: the Representative Bias Score (RBS) and the Affinity Bias Score (ABS), and present the Creativity-Oriented Generation Suite (CoGS), a collection of open-ended tasks such as short story writing and poetry composition, designed with customized rubrics to detect these subtle biases. Our analysis uncovers marked representative biases in prominent LLMs, with a preference for identities associated with being white, straight, and men. Furthermore, our investigation of affinity bias reveals distinctive evaluative patterns within each model, akin to `bias fingerprints'. This trend is also seen in human evaluators, highlighting a complex interplay between human and machine bias perceptions.
6/4/2024
💬
Social Bias Probing: Fairness Benchmarking for Language Models
Marta Marchiori Manerba, Karolina Sta'nczak, Riccardo Guidotti, Isabelle Augenstein
0
0
While the impact of social biases in language models has been recognized, prior methods for bias evaluation have been limited to binary association tests on small datasets, limiting our understanding of bias complexities. This paper proposes a novel framework for probing language models for social biases by assessing disparate treatment, which involves treating individuals differently according to their affiliation with a sensitive demographic group. We curate SOFA, a large-scale benchmark designed to address the limitations of existing fairness collections. SOFA expands the analysis beyond the binary comparison of stereotypical versus anti-stereotypical identities to include a diverse range of identities and stereotypes. Comparing our methodology with existing benchmarks, we reveal that biases within language models are more nuanced than acknowledged, indicating a broader scope of encoded biases than previously recognized. Benchmarking LMs on SOFA, we expose how identities expressing different religions lead to the most pronounced disparate treatments across all models. Finally, our findings indicate that real-life adversities faced by various groups such as women and people with disabilities are mirrored in the behavior of these models.
6/26/2024
Evaluating Algorithmic Bias in Models for Predicting Academic Performance of Filipino Students
Valdemar v{S}v'abensk'y, M'elina Verger, Maria Mercedes T. Rodrigo, Clarence James G. Monterozo, Ryan S. Baker, Miguel Zenon Nicanor Lerias Saavedra, S'ebastien Lall'e, Atsushi Shimada
0
0
Algorithmic bias is a major issue in machine learning models in educational contexts. However, it has not yet been studied thoroughly in Asian learning contexts, and only limited work has considered algorithmic bias based on regional (sub-national) background. As a step towards addressing this gap, this paper examines the population of 5,986 students at a large university in the Philippines, investigating algorithmic bias based on students' regional background. The university used the Canvas learning management system (LMS) in its online courses across a broad range of domains. Over the period of three semesters, we collected 48.7 million log records of the students' activity in Canvas. We used these logs to train binary classification models that predict student grades from the LMS activity. The best-performing model reached AUC of 0.75 and weighted F1-score of 0.79. Subsequently, we examined the data for bias based on students' region. Evaluation using three metrics: AUC, weighted F1-score, and MADD showed consistent results across all demographic groups. Thus, no unfairness was observed against a particular student group in the grade predictions.
5/17/2024