REVIEW 3 cited by
Bias Out-of-the-Box: An Empirical Analysis of Intersectional Occupational Biases in Popular Generative Language Models
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Bias Out-of-the-Box: An Empirical Analysis of Intersectional Occupational Biases in Popular Generative Language Models
read the original abstract
The capabilities of natural language models trained on large-scale data have increased immensely over the past few years. Open source libraries such as HuggingFace have made these models easily available and accessible. While prior research has identified biases in large language models, this paper considers biases contained in the most popular versions of these models when applied `out-of-the-box' for downstream tasks. We focus on generative language models as they are well-suited for extracting biases inherited from training data. Specifically, we conduct an in-depth analysis of GPT-2, which is the most downloaded text generation model on HuggingFace, with over half a million downloads per month. We assess biases related to occupational associations for different protected categories by intersecting gender with religion, sexuality, ethnicity, political affiliation, and continental name origin. Using a template-based data collection pipeline, we collect 396K sentence completions made by GPT-2 and find: (i) The machine-predicted jobs are less diverse and more stereotypical for women than for men, especially for intersections; (ii) Intersectional interactions are highly relevant for occupational associations, which we quantify by fitting 262 logistic models; (iii) For most occupations, GPT-2 reflects the skewed gender and ethnicity distribution found in US Labor Bureau data, and even pulls the societally-skewed distribution towards gender parity in cases where its predictions deviate from real labor market observations. This raises the normative question of what language models should learn - whether they should reflect or correct for existing inequalities.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
CATCH-ME if you RAG: a dataset of Contextually Annotated multi-Turn Counterspeech against Hate and Misinformation Exchanges
Presents a new expert-curated dataset of multi-turn counterspeech dialogues in five languages targeting hate against seven groups, with span annotations linking to verified external knowledge for RAG applications.
-
Assisted Counterspeech Writing at the Crossroads of Hate Speech and Misinformation
LLMs generate adequate counterspeech for co-occurring hate and misinformation in 40% of cases, with a mixed knowledge strategy from fact-checkers and NGOs proving most effective after expert revision.
-
Epistemic Injustice in Language Models: An Audit of Pretraining Filters and Guardrails
An audit finds language model filters and guardrails disproportionately suppress mentions of marginalized groups via lexical cues while failing to catch explicit harms.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.