Whose Emotions and Moral Sentiments Do Language Models Reflect?
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- This research paper investigates whose emotional and moral sentiments are reflected in the language models trained on large datasets.
- The authors measure the "affective alignment" between language models and different demographic groups to understand whose perspectives and experiences are captured in these models.
- They analyze online sociopolitical discourse to assess the political and ideological biases present in language models.
- The findings have important implications for the development of fair and inclusive AI systems that accurately represent diverse human perspectives.
Plain English Explanation
Language models are artificial intelligence systems that are trained on vast amounts of text data to generate human-like language. These models have become increasingly powerful and are being used in a variety of applications, from chatbots to content generation.
However, the researchers behind this paper were curious about whose emotional and moral perspectives these language models actually reflect. After all, the text data used to train these models was likely produced by a particular subset of the population, which could lead to biases in the models' outputs.
To investigate this, the researchers looked at how closely the language models' emotional and moral sentiments aligned with different demographic groups, such as those based on political ideology, race, and gender. They analyzed online discussions about sociopolitical issues to understand the political and ideological biases present in the language models.
The findings suggest that the language models' emotional and moral sentiments tend to align more closely with certain demographic groups, such as white individuals and those with conservative political leanings. This raises important questions about the inclusivity and fairness of these AI systems, as they may not accurately reflect the perspectives and experiences of diverse populations.
The researchers' work has significant implications for the development of ethical and inclusive AI that can better represent the full range of human experiences and perspectives. By understanding the biases inherent in language models, researchers and developers can work to create more equitable and representative AI systems.
Technical Explanation
The researchers used a combination of techniques to measure the "affective alignment" between language models and different demographic groups. They first extracted emotional and moral sentiments from the language models' outputs using various sentiment analysis tools. They then compared these sentiments to those expressed by individuals in online sociopolitical discourse, which they used as a proxy for the sentiments of different demographic groups.
To analyze the online discourse, the researchers collected a large dataset of comments from social media and online forums, focusing on discussions related to political and social issues. They then used machine learning models to categorize the commenters into different demographic groups based on factors such as political ideology, race, and gender.
By comparing the emotional and moral sentiments expressed in the language models' outputs to those found in the online discourse, the researchers were able to assess the degree of alignment between the models and the different demographic groups. Their findings suggest that the language models tend to reflect the perspectives and experiences of certain groups, such as white individuals and those with conservative political leanings, more closely than others.
The researchers also conducted a series of additional experiments to further explore the emotional and ethical biases present in the language models. For example, they analyzed the models' responses to prompts designed to elicit moral judgments and found that the models' responses were influenced by their alignment with particular demographic groups.
Critical Analysis
The researchers acknowledge several limitations and caveats in their study. First, the use of online discourse as a proxy for the sentiments of different demographic groups may not fully capture the diversity of perspectives within those groups. Additionally, the demographic categorization of commenters was based on machine learning models, which could introduce errors or biases.
Another potential issue is the use of sentiment analysis tools, which may not always accurately capture the nuanced and context-dependent nature of emotional and moral sentiments. The researchers note that further refinement of these tools could lead to more reliable measurement of affective alignment.
It's also important to consider the potential impact of the training data used to develop the language models. The researchers suggest that the biases observed in the models may be a reflection of the biases present in the text corpora used for training. Addressing these biases in the underlying data could be a crucial step in creating more inclusive and representative AI systems.
Despite these limitations, the researchers' work highlights the pressing need to better understand the demographic biases and representational issues inherent in large language models. By bringing these issues to the forefront, the study encourages further research and development in the pursuit of ethical and inclusive AI.
Conclusion
This research paper sheds light on an important but often overlooked aspect of language models: whose emotional and moral sentiments they actually reflect. The findings suggest that these models tend to align more closely with the perspectives of certain demographic groups, raising concerns about the fairness and inclusivity of the AI systems they power.
The researchers' work highlights the need for a deeper understanding of the biases and representational issues in large language models, and it underscores the importance of developing ethical and inclusive AI that can accurately capture the full range of human experiences and perspectives. By addressing these challenges, the AI community can work towards creating technology that truly serves and empowers all members of society.
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
Whose Emotions and Moral Sentiments Do Language Models Reflect?
Zihao He, Siyi Guo, Ashwin Rao, Kristina Lerman
Language models (LMs) are known to represent the perspectives of some social groups better than others, which may impact their performance, especially on subjective tasks such as content moderation and hate speech detection. To explore how LMs represent different perspectives, existing research focused on positional alignment, i.e., how closely the models mimic the opinions and stances of different groups, e.g., liberals or conservatives. However, human communication also encompasses emotional and moral dimensions. We define the problem of affective alignment, which measures how LMs' emotional and moral tone represents those of different groups. By comparing the affect of responses generated by 36 LMs to the affect of Twitter messages, we observe significant misalignment of LMs with both ideological groups. This misalignment is larger than the partisan divide in the U.S. Even after steering the LMs towards specific ideological perspectives, the misalignment and liberal tendencies of the model persist, suggesting a systemic bias within LMs.
Read more6/19/2024
💬
0
Modeling Emotions and Ethics with Large Language Models
Edward Y. Chang
This paper explores the integration of human-like emotions and ethical considerations into Large Language Models (LLMs). We first model eight fundamental human emotions, presented as opposing pairs, and employ collaborative LLMs to reinterpret and express these emotions across a spectrum of intensity. Our focus extends to embedding a latent ethical dimension within LLMs, guided by a novel self-supervised learning algorithm with human feedback (SSHF). This approach enables LLMs to perform self-evaluations and adjustments concerning ethical guidelines, enhancing their capability to generate content that is not only emotionally resonant but also ethically aligned. The methodologies and case studies presented herein illustrate the potential of LLMs to transcend mere text and image generation, venturing into the realms of empathetic interaction and principled decision-making, thereby setting a new precedent in the development of emotionally aware and ethically conscious AI systems.
Read more4/23/2024
0
Examining the Influence of Political Bias on Large Language Model Performance in Stance Classification
Lynnette Hui Xian Ng, Iain Cruickshank, Roy Ka-Wei Lee
Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in executing tasks based on natural language queries. However, these models, trained on curated datasets, inherently embody biases ranging from racial to national and gender biases. It remains uncertain whether these biases impact the performance of LLMs for certain tasks. In this study, we investigate the political biases of LLMs within the stance classification task, specifically examining whether these models exhibit a tendency to more accurately classify politically-charged stances. Utilizing three datasets, seven LLMs, and four distinct prompting schemes, we analyze the performance of LLMs on politically oriented statements and targets. Our findings reveal a statistically significant difference in the performance of LLMs across various politically oriented stance classification tasks. Furthermore, we observe that this difference primarily manifests at the dataset level, with models and prompting schemes showing statistically similar performances across different stance classification datasets. Lastly, we observe that when there is greater ambiguity in the target the statement is directed towards, LLMs have poorer stance classification accuracy. Code & Dataset: http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.12938478
Read more7/29/2024
💬
0
Assessing Political Bias in Large Language Models
Luca Rettenberger, Markus Reischl, Mark Schutera
The assessment of bias within Large Language Models (LLMs) has emerged as a critical concern in the contemporary discourse surrounding Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the context of their potential impact on societal dynamics. Recognizing and considering political bias within LLM applications is especially important when closing in on the tipping point toward performative prediction. Then, being educated about potential effects and the societal behavior LLMs can drive at scale due to their interplay with human operators. In this way, the upcoming elections of the European Parliament will not remain unaffected by LLMs. We evaluate the political bias of the currently most popular open-source LLMs (instruct or assistant models) concerning political issues within the European Union (EU) from a German voter's perspective. To do so, we use the Wahl-O-Mat, a voting advice application used in Germany. From the voting advice of the Wahl-O-Mat we quantize the degree of alignment of LLMs with German political parties. We show that larger models, such as Llama3-70B, tend to align more closely with left-leaning political parties, while smaller models often remain neutral, particularly when prompted in English. The central finding is that LLMs are similarly biased, with low variances in the alignment concerning a specific party. Our findings underline the importance of rigorously assessing and making bias transparent in LLMs to safeguard the integrity and trustworthiness of applications that employ the capabilities of performative prediction and the invisible hand of machine learning prediction and language generation.
Read more6/6/2024