Decoding the Mind of Large Language Models: A Quantitative Evaluation of Ideology and Biases

The widespread integration of Large Language Models (LLMs) across various sectors has highlighted the need for empirical research to understand their biases, thought patterns, and societal implications to ensure ethical and effective use. In this study, we propose a novel framework for evaluating LLMs, focusing on uncovering their ideological biases through a quantitative analysis of 436 binary-choice questions, many of which have no definitive answer. By applying our framework to ChatGPT and Gemini, findings revealed that while LLMs generally maintain consistent opinions on many topics, their ideologies differ across models and languages. Notably, ChatGPT exhibits a tendency to change their opinion to match the questioner's opinion. Both models also exhibited problematic biases, unethical or unfair claims, which might have negative societal impacts. These results underscore the importance of addressing both ideological and ethical considerations when evaluating LLMs. The proposed framework offers a flexible, quantitative method for assessing LLM behavior, providing valuable insights for the development of more socially aligned AI systems.

Learning from Complementary Features

While precise data observation is essential for the learning processes of predictive models, it can be challenging owing to factors such as insufficient observation accuracy, high collection costs, and privacy constraints. In this paper, we examines cases where some qualitative features are unavailable as precise information indicating "what it is," but rather as complementary information indicating "what it is not." We refer to features defined by precise information as ordinary features (OFs) and those defined by complementary information as complementary features (CFs). We then formulate a new learning scenario termed Complementary Feature Learning (CFL), where predictive models are constructed using instances consisting of OFs and CFs. The simplest formalization of CFL applies conventional supervised learning directly using the observed values of CFs. However, this approach does not resolve the ambiguity associated with CFs, making learning challenging and complicating the interpretation of the predictive model's specific predictions. Therefore, we derive an objective function from an information-theoretic perspective to estimate the OF values corresponding to CFs and to predict output labels based on these estimations. Based on this objective function, we propose a theoretically guaranteed graph-based estimation method along with its practical approximation, for estimating OF values corresponding to CFs. The results of numerical experiments conducted with real-world data demonstrate that our proposed method effectively estimates OF values corresponding to CFs and predicts output labels.

Q&A Label Learning

Assigning labels to instances is crucial for supervised machine learning. In this paper, we proposed a novel annotation method called Q&A labeling, which involves a question generator that asks questions about the labels of the instances to be assigned, and an annotator who answers the questions and assigns the corresponding labels to the instances. We derived a generative model of labels assigned according to two different Q&A labeling procedures that differ in the way questions are asked and answered. We showed that, in both procedures, the derived model is partially consistent with that assumed in previous studies. The main distinction of this study from previous studies lies in the fact that the label generative model was not assumed, but rather derived based on the definition of a specific annotation method, Q&A labeling. We also derived a loss function to evaluate the classification risk of ordinary supervised machine learning using instances assigned Q&A labels and evaluated the upper bound of the classification error. The results indicate statistical consistency in learning with Q&A labels.

Bridging Ordinary-Label Learning and Complementary-Label Learning

Unlike ordinary supervised pattern recognition, in a newly proposed framework namely complementary-label learning, each label specifies one class that the pattern does not belong to. In this paper, we propose the natural generalization of learning from an ordinary label and a complementary label, specifically focused on one-versus-all and pairwise classification. We assume that annotation with a bag of complementary labels is equivalent to providing the rest of all the labels as the candidates of the one true class. Our derived classification risk is in a comprehensive form that includes those in the literature, and succeeded to explicitly show the relationship between the single and multiple ordinary/complementary labels. We further show both theoretically and experimentally that the classification error bound monotonically decreases corresponding to the number of complementary labels. This is consistent because the more complementary labels are provided, the less supervision becomes ambiguous.