Persona-driven Simulation of Voting Behavior in the European Parliament with Large Language Models

Large Language Models (LLMs) display remarkable capabilities to understand or even produce political discourse, but have been found to consistently display a progressive left-leaning bias. At the same time, so-called persona or identity prompts have been shown to produce LLM behavior that aligns with socioeconomic groups that the base model is not aligned with. In this work, we analyze whether zero-shot persona prompting with limited information can accurately predict individual voting decisions and, by aggregation, accurately predict positions of European groups on a diverse set of policies. We evaluate if predictions are stable towards counterfactual arguments, different persona prompts and generation methods. Finally, we find that we can simulate voting behavior of Members of the European Parliament reasonably well with a weighted F1 score of approximately 0.793. Our persona dataset of politicians in the 2024 European Parliament and our code are available at https://github.com/dess-mannheim/european_parliament_simulation.

Local Contrastive Editing of Gender Stereotypes

Stereotypical bias encoded in language models (LMs) poses a threat to safe language technology, yet our understanding of how bias manifests in the parameters of LMs remains incomplete. We introduce local contrastive editing that enables the localization and editing of a subset of weights in a target model in relation to a reference model. We deploy this approach to identify and modify subsets of weights that are associated with gender stereotypes in LMs. Through a series of experiments, we demonstrate that local contrastive editing can precisely localize and control a small subset (< 0.5%) of weights that encode gender bias. Our work (i) advances our understanding of how stereotypical biases can manifest in the parameter space of LMs and (ii) opens up new avenues for developing parameter-efficient strategies for controlling model properties in a contrastive manner.

SensePOLAR: Word sense aware interpretability for pre-trained contextual word embeddings

Adding interpretability to word embeddings represents an area of active research in text representation. Recent work has explored thepotential of embedding words via so-called polar dimensions (e.g. good vs. bad, correct vs. wrong). Examples of such recent approaches include SemAxis, POLAR, FrameAxis, and BiImp. Although these approaches provide interpretable dimensions for words, they have not been designed to deal with polysemy, i.e. they can not easily distinguish between different senses of words. To address this limitation, we present SensePOLAR, an extension of the original POLAR framework that enables word-sense aware interpretability for pre-trained contextual word embeddings. The resulting interpretable word embeddings achieve a level of performance that is comparable to original contextual word embeddings across a variety of natural language processing tasks including the GLUE and SQuAD benchmarks. Our work removes a fundamental limitation of existing approaches by offering users sense aware interpretations for contextual word embeddings.

Properties of Group Fairness Metrics for Rankings

In recent years, several metrics have been developed for evaluating group fairness of rankings. Given that these metrics were developed with different application contexts and ranking algorithms in mind, it is not straightforward which metric to choose for a given scenario. In this paper, we perform a comprehensive comparative analysis of existing group fairness metrics developed in the context of fair ranking. By virtue of their diverse application contexts, we argue that such a comparative analysis is not straightforward. Hence, we take an axiomatic approach whereby we design a set of thirteen properties for group fairness metrics that consider different ranking settings. A metric can then be selected depending on whether it satisfies all or a subset of these properties. We apply these properties on eleven existing group fairness metrics, and through both empirical and theoretical results we demonstrate that most of these metrics only satisfy a small subset of the proposed properties. These findings highlight limitations of existing metrics, and provide insights into how to evaluate and interpret different fairness metrics in practical deployment. The proposed properties can also assist practitioners in selecting appropriate metrics for evaluating fairness in a specific application.