Mitigating Gender Bias in Neural Machine Translation Using Counterfactual Data

Recent advances in deep learning have greatly improved the ability of researchers to develop effective machine translation systems. In particular, the application of modern neural architectures, such as the Transformer, has achieved state-of-the-art BLEU scores in many translation tasks. However, it has been found that even state-of-the-art neural machine translation models can suffer from certain implicit biases, such as gender bias (Lu et al., 2019). In response to this issue, researchers have proposed various potential solutions: some have proposed approaches that inject missing gender information into models, while others have attempted modifying the training data itself. We focus on mitigating gender bias through the use of both counterfactual data augmentation and data substitution techniques, exploring how the two techniques compare when applied to different datasets, how gender bias mitigation varies with the amount of counterfactual data used, and how these techniques may affect BLEU score

A Survey on Fairness in Large Language Models

Large language models (LLMs) have shown powerful performance and development prospect and are widely deployed in the real world. However, LLMs can capture social biases from unprocessed training data and propagate the biases to downstream tasks. Unfair LLM systems have undesirable social impacts and potential harms. In this paper, we provide a comprehensive review of related research on fairness in LLMs. First, for medium-scale LLMs, we introduce evaluation metrics and debiasing methods from the perspectives of intrinsic bias and extrinsic bias, respectively. Then, for large-scale LLMs, we introduce recent fairness research, including fairness evaluation, reasons for bias, and debiasing methods. Finally, we discuss and provide insight on the challenges and future directions for the development of fairness in LLMs.Comment: 12 pages, 2 figures, 101 reference

Language (Technology) is Power: A Critical Survey of "Bias" in NLP

We survey 146 papers analyzing "bias" in NLP systems, finding that their motivations are often vague, inconsistent, and lacking in normative reasoning, despite the fact that analyzing "bias" is an inherently normative process. We further find that these papers' proposed quantitative techniques for measuring or mitigating "bias" are poorly matched to their motivations and do not engage with the relevant literature outside of NLP. Based on these findings, we describe the beginnings of a path forward by proposing three recommendations that should guide work analyzing "bias" in NLP systems. These recommendations rest on a greater recognition of the relationships between language and social hierarchies, encouraging researchers and practitioners to articulate their conceptualizations of "bias"---i.e., what kinds of system behaviors are harmful, in what ways, to whom, and why, as well as the normative reasoning underlying these statements---and to center work around the lived experiences of members of communities affected by NLP systems, while interrogating and reimagining the power relations between technologists and such communities

Effectiveness of Debiasing Techniques: An Indigenous Qualitative Analysis

An indigenous perspective on the effectiveness of debiasing techniques for pre-trained language models (PLMs) is presented in this paper. The current techniques used to measure and debias PLMs are skewed towards the US racial biases and rely on pre-defined bias attributes (e.g. "black" vs "white"). Some require large datasets and further pre-training. Such techniques are not designed to capture the underrepresented indigenous populations in other countries, such as M\=aori in New Zealand. Local knowledge and understanding must be incorporated to ensure unbiased algorithms, especially when addressing a resource-restricted society.Comment: accepted with invite to presen

Survey of Social Bias in Vision-Language Models

In recent years, the rapid advancement of machine learning (ML) models, particularly transformer-based pre-trained models, has revolutionized Natural Language Processing (NLP) and Computer Vision (CV) fields. However, researchers have discovered that these models can inadvertently capture and reinforce social biases present in their training datasets, leading to potential social harms, such as uneven resource allocation and unfair representation of specific social groups. Addressing these biases and ensuring fairness in artificial intelligence (AI) systems has become a critical concern in the ML community. The recent introduction of pre-trained vision-and-language (VL) models in the emerging multimodal field demands attention to the potential social biases present in these models as well. Although VL models are susceptible to social bias, there is a limited understanding compared to the extensive discussions on bias in NLP and CV. This survey aims to provide researchers with a high-level insight into the similarities and differences of social bias studies in pre-trained models across NLP, CV, and VL. By examining these perspectives, the survey aims to offer valuable guidelines on how to approach and mitigate social bias in both unimodal and multimodal settings. The findings and recommendations presented here can benefit the ML community, fostering the development of fairer and non-biased AI models in various applications and research endeavors