The reviewed record of science sign in
Pith

arxiv: 2306.11247 · v1 · pith:PCXRFGVS · submitted 2023-06-20 · cs.HC

DICES Dataset: Diversity in Conversational AI Evaluation for Safety

Reviewed by Pith T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 kernel pith:PCXRFGVSrecord.jsonopen to challenge →

classification cs.HC
keywords safetyconversationaldatasetdicesdiversityevaluationdatasetsanalyses
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

Machine learning approaches often require training and evaluation datasets with a clear separation between positive and negative examples. This risks simplifying and even obscuring the inherent subjectivity present in many tasks. Preserving such variance in content and diversity in datasets is often expensive and laborious. This is especially troubling when building safety datasets for conversational AI systems, as safety is both socially and culturally situated. To demonstrate this crucial aspect of conversational AI safety, and to facilitate in-depth model performance analyses, we introduce the DICES (Diversity In Conversational AI Evaluation for Safety) dataset that contains fine-grained demographic information about raters, high replication of ratings per item to ensure statistical power for analyses, and encodes rater votes as distributions across different demographics to allow for in-depth explorations of different aggregation strategies. In short, the DICES dataset enables the observation and measurement of variance, ambiguity, and diversity in the context of conversational AI safety. We also illustrate how the dataset offers a basis for establishing metrics to show how raters' ratings can intersects with demographic categories such as racial/ethnic groups, age groups, and genders. The goal of DICES is to be used as a shared resource and benchmark that respects diverse perspectives during safety evaluation of conversational AI systems.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Pluralis v0.1: Towards a Multicultural, Multimodal, Multilingual Benchmark for AI Risk and Reliability

    cs.CL 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0

    Pluralis v0.1 is a culture-first, multimodal, multilingual VLM safety benchmark spanning 6 APAC locales with 6,448 prompts and an agreement-gated LLM judge that disentangles safety from cultural appropriateness.

  2. Does Capability Transfer to Subjective Behavior -- and Would Our Instruments Tell Us? A Self-Evolving, Trust-by-Construction Evaluation Paradigm

    cs.CL 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Self-evolving rubric with anti-gaming fitness reveals that objective capability scaling fails to transfer to subjective LLM behaviors, with advice-restraint as the universal lowest dimension that can regress.

  3. A Roadmap to Pluralistic Alignment

    cs.AI 2024-02 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    The paper formalizes three types of pluralistic AI models and three benchmark classes, arguing that current alignment techniques may reduce rather than increase distributional pluralism.

  4. Relative Principals, Pluralistic Alignment, and the Structural Value Alignment Problem

    cs.CY 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    AI value alignment is reconceptualized as a pluralistic governance problem arising along three axes—objectives, information, and principals—making it inherently context-dependent and unsolvable by technical design alone.