Detecting Stereotypes and Anti-stereotypes the Correct Way Using Social Psychological Underpinnings

Stereotypes are known to be highly pernicious, making their detection critically important. However, current research predominantly focuses on detecting and evaluating stereotypical biases in LLMs, leaving the study of stereotypes in its early stages. Many studies have failed to clearly distinguish between stereotypes and stereotypical biases, which has significantly slowed progress in advancing research in this area. Stereotype and anti-stereotype detection is a problem that requires knowledge of society; hence, it is one of the most difficult areas in Responsible AI. This work investigates this task, where we propose a four-tuple definition and provide precise terminology distinguishing stereotype, anti-stereotype, stereotypical bias, and bias, offering valuable insights into their various aspects. In this paper, we propose StereoDetect, a high-quality benchmarking dataset curated for this task by optimally utilizing current datasets such as StereoSet and WinoQueer, involving a manual verification process and the transfer of semantic information. We demonstrate that language models for reasoning with fewer than 10B parameters often get confused when detecting anti-stereotypes. We also demonstrate the critical importance of well-curated datasets by comparing our model with other current models for stereotype detection. The dataset and code is available at https://github.com/KaustubhShejole/StereoDetect.

Rethinking Prompt-based Debiasing in Large Language Models

Investigating bias in large language models (LLMs) is crucial for developing trustworthy AI. While prompt-based through prompt engineering is common, its effectiveness relies on the assumption that models inherently understand biases. Our study systematically analyzed this assumption using the BBQ and StereoSet benchmarks on both open-source models as well as commercial GPT model. Experimental results indicate that prompt-based is often superficial; for instance, the Llama2-7B-Chat model misclassified over 90% of unbiased content as biased, despite achieving high accuracy in identifying bias issues on the BBQ dataset. Additionally, specific evaluation and question settings in bias benchmarks often lead LLMs to choose "evasive answers", disregarding the core of the question and the relevance of the response to the context. Moreover, the apparent success of previous methods may stem from flawed evaluation metrics. Our research highlights a potential "false prosperity" in prompt-base efforts and emphasizes the need to rethink bias metrics to ensure truly trustworthy AI.

BiasEdit: Debiasing Stereotyped Language Models via Model Editing

Previous studies have established that language models manifest stereotyped biases. Existing debiasing strategies, such as retraining a model with counterfactual data, representation projection, and prompting often fail to efficiently eliminate bias or directly alter the models' biased internal representations. To address these issues, we propose BiasEdit, an efficient model editing method to remove stereotypical bias from language models through lightweight networks that act as editors to generate parameter updates. BiasEdit employs a debiasing loss guiding editor networks to conduct local edits on partial parameters of a language model for debiasing while preserving the language modeling abilities during editing through a retention loss. Experiments on StereoSet and Crows-Pairs demonstrate the effectiveness, efficiency, and robustness of BiasEdit in eliminating bias compared to tangental debiasing baselines and little to no impact on the language models' general capabilities. In addition, we conduct bias tracing to probe bias in various modules and explore bias editing impacts on different components of language models.

LLMs are Vulnerable to Malicious Prompts Disguised as Scientific Language

As large language models (LLMs) have been deployed in various real-world settings, concerns about the harm they may propagate have grown. Various jailbreaking techniques have been developed to expose the vulnerabilities of these models and improve their safety. This work reveals that many state-of-the-art proprietary and open-source LLMs are vulnerable to malicious requests hidden behind scientific language. Specifically, our experiments with GPT4o, GPT4o-mini, GPT-4, LLama3-405B-Instruct, Llama3-70B-Instruct, Cohere, Gemini models on the StereoSet data demonstrate that, the models' biases and toxicity substantially increase when prompted with requests that deliberately misinterpret social science and psychological studies as evidence supporting the benefits of stereotypical biases. Alarmingly, these models can also be manipulated to generate fabricated scientific arguments claiming that biases are beneficial, which can be used by ill-intended actors to systematically jailbreak even the strongest models like GPT. Our analysis studies various factors that contribute to the models' vulnerabilities to malicious requests in academic language. Mentioning author names and venues enhances the persuasiveness of some models, and the bias scores can increase as dialogues progress. Our findings call for a more careful investigation on the use of scientific data in the training of LLMs.

Mitigating Social Bias in Large Language Models: A Multi-Objective Approach within a Multi-Agent Framework

Natural language processing (NLP) has seen remarkable advancements with the development of large language models (LLMs). Despite these advancements, LLMs often produce socially biased outputs. Recent studies have mainly addressed this problem by prompting LLMs to behave ethically, but this approach results in unacceptable performance degradation. In this paper, we propose a multi-objective approach within a multi-agent framework (MOMA) to mitigate social bias in LLMs without significantly compromising their performance. The key idea of MOMA involves deploying multiple agents to perform causal interventions on bias-related contents of the input questions, breaking the shortcut connection between these contents and the corresponding answers. Unlike traditional debiasing techniques leading to performance degradation, MOMA substantially reduces bias while maintaining accuracy in downstream tasks. Our experiments conducted on two datasets and two models demonstrate that MOMA reduces bias scores by up to 87.7%, with only a marginal performance degradation of up to 6.8% in the BBQ dataset. Additionally, it significantly enhances the multi-objective metric icat in the StereoSet dataset by up to 58.1%. Code will be made available at https://github.com/Cortantse/MOMA.

STOP! Benchmarking Large Language Models with Sensitivity Testing on Offensive Progressions

Mitigating explicit and implicit biases in Large Language Models (LLMs) has become a critical focus in the field of natural language processing. However, many current methodologies evaluate scenarios in isolation, without considering the broader context or the spectrum of potential biases within each situation. To address this, we introduce the Sensitivity Testing on Offensive Progressions (STOP) dataset, which includes 450 offensive progressions containing 2,700 unique sentences of varying severity that progressively escalate from less to more explicitly offensive. Covering a broad spectrum of 9 demographics and 46 sub-demographics, STOP ensures inclusivity and comprehensive coverage. We evaluate several leading closed- and open-source models, including GPT-4, Mixtral, and Llama 3. Our findings reveal that even the best-performing models detect bias inconsistently, with success rates ranging from 19.3% to 69.8%. We also demonstrate how aligning models with human judgments on STOP can improve model answer rates on sensitive tasks such as BBQ, StereoSet, and CrowS-Pairs by up to 191%, while maintaining or even improving performance. STOP presents a novel framework for assessing the complex nature of biases in LLMs, which will enable more effective bias mitigation strategies and facilitates the creation of fairer language models.

BanStereoSet: A Dataset to Measure Stereotypical Social Biases in LLMs for Bangla

This study presents BanStereoSet, a dataset designed to evaluate stereotypical social biases in multilingual LLMs for the Bangla language. In an effort to extend the focus of bias research beyond English-centric datasets, we have localized the content from the StereoSet, IndiBias, and Kamruzzaman et. al.'s datasets, producing a resource tailored to capture biases prevalent within the Bangla-speaking community. Our BanStereoSet dataset consists of 1,194 sentences spanning 9 categories of bias: race, profession, gender, ageism, beauty, beauty in profession, region, caste, and religion. This dataset not only serves as a crucial tool for measuring bias in multilingual LLMs but also facilitates the exploration of stereotypical bias across different social categories, potentially guiding the development of more equitable language technologies in Bangladeshi contexts. Our analysis of several language models using this dataset indicates significant biases, reinforcing the necessity for culturally and linguistically adapted datasets to develop more equitable language technologies.

Spoken Stereoset: On Evaluating Social Bias Toward Speaker in Speech Large Language Models

Warning: This paper may contain texts with uncomfortable content. Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable performance in various tasks, including those involving multimodal data like speech. However, these models often exhibit biases due to the nature of their training data. Recently, more Speech Large Language Models (SLLMs) have emerged, underscoring the urgent need to address these biases. This study introduces Spoken Stereoset, a dataset specifically designed to evaluate social biases in SLLMs. By examining how different models respond to speech from diverse demographic groups, we aim to identify these biases. Our experiments reveal significant insights into their performance and bias levels. The findings indicate that while most models show minimal bias, some still exhibit slightly stereotypical or anti-stereotypical tendencies.

The Devil is in the Neurons: Interpreting and Mitigating Social Biases in Pre-trained Language Models

Pre-trained Language models (PLMs) have been acknowledged to contain harmful information, such as social biases, which may cause negative social impacts or even bring catastrophic results in application. Previous works on this problem mainly focused on using black-box methods such as probing to detect and quantify social biases in PLMs by observing model outputs. As a result, previous debiasing methods mainly finetune or even pre-train language models on newly constructed anti-stereotypical datasets, which are high-cost. In this work, we try to unveil the mystery of social bias inside language models by introducing the concept of {\sc Social Bias Neurons}. Specifically, we propose {\sc Integrated Gap Gradients (IG$^2$)} to accurately pinpoint units (i.e., neurons) in a language model that can be attributed to undesirable behavior, such as social bias. By formalizing undesirable behavior as a distributional property of language, we employ sentiment-bearing prompts to elicit classes of sensitive words (demographics) correlated with such sentiments. Our IG$^2$ thus attributes the uneven distribution for different demographics to specific Social Bias Neurons, which track the trail of unwanted behavior inside PLM units to achieve interoperability. Moreover, derived from our interpretable technique, {\sc Bias Neuron Suppression (BNS)} is further proposed to mitigate social biases. By studying BERT, RoBERTa, and their attributable differences from debiased FairBERTa, IG$^2$ allows us to locate and suppress identified neurons, and further mitigate undesired behaviors. As measured by prior metrics from StereoSet, our model achieves a higher degree of fairness while maintaining language modeling ability with low cost.

Investigating Bias Representations in Llama 2 Chat via Activation Steering

We address the challenge of societal bias in Large Language Models (LLMs), focusing on the Llama 2 7B Chat model. As LLMs are increasingly integrated into decision-making processes with substantial societal impact, it becomes imperative to ensure these models do not reinforce existing biases. Our approach employs activation steering to probe for and mitigate biases related to gender, race, and religion. This method manipulates model activations to direct responses towards or away from biased outputs, utilizing steering vectors derived from the StereoSet dataset and custom GPT4 generated gender bias prompts. Our findings reveal inherent gender bias in Llama 2 7B Chat, persisting even after Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF). We also observe a predictable negative correlation between bias and the model's tendency to refuse responses. Significantly, our study uncovers that RLHF tends to increase the similarity in the model's representation of different forms of societal biases, which raises questions about the model's nuanced understanding of different forms of bias. This work also provides valuable insights into effective red-teaming strategies for LLMs using activation steering, particularly emphasizing the importance of integrating a refusal vector.