Ethical and social risks of harm from Language Models

This paper aims to help structure the risk landscape associated with large-scale Language Models (LMs). In order to foster advances in responsible innovation, an in-depth understanding of the potential risks posed by these models is needed. A wide range of established and anticipated risks are analysed in detail, drawing on multidisciplinary expertise and literature from computer science, linguistics, and social sciences. We outline six specific risk areas: I. Discrimination, Exclusion and Toxicity, II. Information Hazards, III. Misinformation Harms, V. Malicious Uses, V. Human-Computer Interaction Harms, VI. Automation, Access, and Environmental Harms. The first area concerns the perpetuation of stereotypes, unfair discrimination, exclusionary norms, toxic language, and lower performance by social group for LMs. The second focuses on risks from private data leaks or LMs correctly inferring sensitive information. The third addresses risks arising from poor, false or misleading information including in sensitive domains, and knock-on risks such as the erosion of trust in shared information. The fourth considers risks from actors who try to use LMs to cause harm. The fifth focuses on risks specific to LLMs used to underpin conversational agents that interact with human users, including unsafe use, manipulation or deception. The sixth discusses the risk of environmental harm, job automation, and other challenges that may have a disparate effect on different social groups or communities. In total, we review 21 risks in-depth. We discuss the points of origin of different risks and point to potential mitigation approaches. Lastly, we discuss organisational responsibilities in implementing mitigations, and the role of collaboration and participation. We highlight directions for further research, particularly on expanding the toolkit for assessing and evaluating the outlined risks in LMs.

Challenges in Detoxifying Language Models

Large language models (LM) generate remarkably fluent text and can be efficiently adapted across NLP tasks. Measuring and guaranteeing the quality of generated text in terms of safety is imperative for deploying LMs in the real world; to this end, prior work often relies on automatic evaluation of LM toxicity. We critically discuss this approach, evaluate several toxicity mitigation strategies with respect to both automatic and human evaluation, and analyze consequences of toxicity mitigation in terms of model bias and LM quality. We demonstrate that while basic intervention strategies can effectively optimize previously established automatic metrics on the RealToxicityPrompts dataset, this comes at the cost of reduced LM coverage for both texts about, and dialects of, marginalized groups. Additionally, we find that human raters often disagree with high automatic toxicity scores after strong toxicity reduction interventions -- highlighting further the nuances involved in careful evaluation of LM toxicity.

Probing Image-Language Transformers for Verb Understanding

Multimodal image-language transformers have achieved impressive results on a variety of tasks that rely on fine-tuning (e.g., visual question answering and image retrieval). We are interested in shedding light on the quality of their pretrained representations -- in particular, if these models can distinguish different types of verbs or if they rely solely on nouns in a given sentence. To do so, we collect a dataset of image-sentence pairs (in English) consisting of 421 verbs that are either visual or commonly found in the pretraining data (i.e., the Conceptual Captions dataset). We use this dataset to evaluate pretrained image-language transformers and find that they fail more in situations that require verb understanding compared to other parts of speech. We also investigate what category of verbs are particularly challenging.

Decoupling the Role of Data, Attention, and Losses in Multimodal Transformers

Recently multimodal transformer models have gained popularity because their performance on language and vision tasks suggest they learn rich visual-linguistic representations. Focusing on zero-shot image retrieval tasks, we study three important factors which can impact the quality of learned representations: pretraining data, the attention mechanism, and loss functions. By pretraining models on six datasets, we observe that dataset noise and language similarity to our downstream task are important indicators of model performance. Through architectural analysis, we learn that models with a multimodal attention mechanism can outperform deeper models with modality specific attention mechanisms. Finally, we show that successful contrastive losses used in the self-supervised learning literature do not yield similar performance gains when used in multimodal transformers

Contrastive Examples for Addressing the Tyranny of the Majority

Computer vision algorithms, e.g. for face recognition, favour groups of individuals that are better represented in the training data. This happens because of the generalization that classifiers have to make. It is simpler to fit the majority groups as this fit is more important to overall error. We propose to create a balanced training dataset, consisting of the original dataset plus new data points in which the group memberships are intervened, minorities become majorities and vice versa. We show that current generative adversarial networks are a powerful tool for learning these data points, called contrastive examples. We experiment with the equalized odds bias measure on tabular data as well as image data (CelebA and Diversity in Faces datasets). Contrastive examples allow us to expose correlations between group membership and other seemingly neutral features. Whenever a causal graph is available, we can put those contrastive examples in the perspective of counterfactuals.

Object Hallucination in Image Captioning

Despite continuously improving performance, contemporary image captioning models are prone to "hallucinating" objects that are not actually in a scene. One problem is that standard metrics only measure similarity to ground truth captions and may not fully capture image relevance. In this work, we propose a new image relevance metric to evaluate current models with veridical visual labels and assess their rate of object hallucination. We analyze how captioning model architectures and learning objectives contribute to object hallucination, explore when hallucination is likely due to image misclassification or language priors, and assess how well current sentence metrics capture object hallucination. We investigate these questions on the standard image caption- ing benchmark, MSCOCO, using a diverse set of models. Our analysis yields several interesting findings, including that models which score best on standard sentence metrics do not always have lower hallucination and that models which hallucinate more tend to make errors driven by language priors.

Localizing Moments in Video with Temporal Language

Localizing moments in a longer video via natural language queries is a new, challenging task at the intersection of language and video understanding. Though moment localization with natural language is similar to other language and vision tasks like natural language object retrieval in images, moment localization offers an interesting opportunity to model temporal dependencies and reasoning in text. We propose a new model that explicitly reasons about different temporal segments in a video, and shows that temporal context is important for localizing phrases which include temporal language. To benchmark whether our model, and other recent video localization models, can effectively reason about temporal language, we collect the novel TEMPOral reasoning in video and language (TEMPO) dataset. Our dataset consists of two parts: a dataset with real videos and template sentences (TEMPO - Template Language) which allows for controlled studies on temporal language, and a human language dataset which consists of temporal sentences annotated by humans (TEMPO - Human Language).

Grounding Visual Explanations

Existing visual explanation generating agents learn to fluently justify a class prediction. However, they may mention visual attributes which reflect a strong class prior, although the evidence may not actually be in the image. This is particularly concerning as ultimately such agents fail in building trust with human users. To overcome this limitation, we propose a phrase-critic model to refine generated candidate explanations augmented with flipped phrases which we use as negative examples while training. At inference time, our phrase-critic model takes an image and a candidate explanation as input and outputs a score indicating how well the candidate explanation is grounded in the image. Our explainable AI agent is capable of providing counter arguments for an alternative prediction, i.e. counterfactuals, along with explanations that justify the correct classification decisions. Our model improves the textual explanation quality of fine-grained classification decisions on the CUB dataset by mentioning phrases that are grounded in the image. Moreover, on the FOIL tasks, our agent detects when there is a mistake in the sentence, grounds the incorrect phrase and corrects it significantly better than other models.

Women also Snowboard: Overcoming Bias in Captioning Models (Extended Abstract)

Most machine learning methods are known to capture and exploit biases of the training data. While some biases are beneficial for learning, others are harmful. Specifically, image captioning models tend to exaggerate biases present in training data. This can lead to incorrect captions in domains where unbiased captions are desired, or required, due to over reliance on the learned prior and image context. We investigate generation of gender specific caption words (e.g. man, woman) based on the person's appearance or the image context. We introduce a new Equalizer model that ensures equal gender probability when gender evidence is occluded in a scene and confident predictions when gender evidence is present. The resulting model is forced to look at a person rather than use contextual cues to make a gender specific prediction. The losses that comprise our model, the Appearance Confusion Loss and the Confident Loss, are general, and can be added to any description model in order to mitigate impacts of unwanted bias in a description dataset. Our proposed model has lower error than prior work when describing images with people and mentioning their gender and more closely matches the ground truth ratio of sentences including women to sentences including men.

Generating Counterfactual Explanations with Natural Language

Natural language explanations of deep neural network decisions provide an intuitive way for a AI agent to articulate a reasoning process. Current textual explanations learn to discuss class discriminative features in an image. However, it is also helpful to understand which attributes might change a classification decision if present in an image (e.g., "This is not a Scarlet Tanager because it does not have black wings.") We call such textual explanations counterfactual explanations, and propose an intuitive method to generate counterfactual explanations by inspecting which evidence in an input is missing, but might contribute to a different classification decision if present in the image. To demonstrate our method we consider a fine-grained image classification task in which we take as input an image and a counterfactual class and output text which explains why the image does not belong to a counterfactual class. We then analyze our generated counterfactual explanations both qualitatively and quantitatively using proposed automatic metrics.