REVIEW 2 cited by
Debiasing Pre-trained Contextualised Embeddings
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
read the original abstract
In comparison to the numerous debiasing methods proposed for the static non-contextualised word embeddings, the discriminative biases in contextualised embeddings have received relatively little attention. We propose a fine-tuning method that can be applied at token- or sentence-levels to debias pre-trained contextualised embeddings. Our proposed method can be applied to any pre-trained contextualised embedding model, without requiring to retrain those models. Using gender bias as an illustrative example, we then conduct a systematic study using several state-of-the-art (SoTA) contextualised representations on multiple benchmark datasets to evaluate the level of biases encoded in different contextualised embeddings before and after debiasing using the proposed method. We find that applying token-level debiasing for all tokens and across all layers of a contextualised embedding model produces the best performance. Interestingly, we observe that there is a trade-off between creating an accurate vs. unbiased contextualised embedding model, and different contextualised embedding models respond differently to this trade-off.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Mitigating Confounding in Speech-Based Dementia Detection through Weight Masking
Masking weights that react to gender in a fine-tuned BERT reduces gender gaps in dementia predictions while keeping most of the detection accuracy.
-
Relative Bias: A Comparative Framework for Quantifying Bias in LLMs
A model is 'relatively biased' when its responses deviate from the consensus of a baseline LLM set, and this deviation can be scored by embedding distances or LLM judges plus equivalence tests.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.