Pith. sign in

REVIEW

On the Independence of Association Bias and Empirical Fairness in Language Models

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2304.10153 v1 pith:4UYDZ6PW submitted 2023-04-20 cs.CL cs.HC

classification cs.CLcs.HC
keywords fairnessbiasempiricalmodelsassociationlanguagemetricsbiases
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

The societal impact of pre-trained language models has prompted researchers to probe them for strong associations between protected attributes and value-loaded terms, from slur to prestigious job titles. Such work is said to probe models for bias or fairness-or such probes 'into representational biases' are said to be 'motivated by fairness'-suggesting an intimate connection between bias and fairness. We provide conceptual clarity by distinguishing between association biases (Caliskan et al., 2022) and empirical fairness (Shen et al., 2022) and show the two can be independent. Our main contribution, however, is showing why this should not come as a surprise. To this end, we first provide a thought experiment, showing how association bias and empirical fairness can be completely orthogonal. Next, we provide empirical evidence that there is no correlation between bias metrics and fairness metrics across the most widely used language models. Finally, we survey the sociological and psychological literature and show how this literature provides ample support for expecting these metrics to be uncorrelated.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Pith tools