REVIEW 3 cited by
A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Natural Language Processing
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
Signed reviews
read the original abstract
As NLP models become more integrated with the everyday lives of people, it becomes important to examine the social effect that the usage of these systems has. While these models understand language and have increased accuracy on difficult downstream tasks, there is evidence that these models amplify gender, racial and cultural stereotypes and lead to a vicious cycle in many settings. In this survey, we analyze the origins of biases, the definitions of fairness, and how different subfields of NLP mitigate bias. We finally discuss how future studies can work towards eradicating pernicious biases from NLP algorithms.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
Bias is a Math Problem, AI Bias is a Technical Problem: 10-year Literature Review of AI/LLM Bias Research Reveals Narrow [Gender-Centric] Conceptions of 'Bias', and Academia-Industry Gap
A ten-year review of 189 AI bias papers finds most do not define bias, most center gender, and few propose real-world fixes.
-
Are We Paying Attention to Her? Investigating Gender Disambiguation and Attention in Machine Translation
The three tested English-to-Italian translation models correctly handle both sentences of a gendered minimal pair only 6 to 38 percent of the time, and they almost never override a masculine default in response to a f...
-
Ethical Concerns of Generative AI and Mitigation Strategies: A Systematic Mapping Study
A systematic map of 39 papers shows LLM ethics concerns cluster into five dimensions, and most mitigation strategies remain unevaluated.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.