REVIEW 2 cited by
Evaluating LLMs for Gender Disparities in Notable Persons
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
This study examines the use of Large Language Models (LLMs) for retrieving factual information, addressing concerns over their propensity to produce factually incorrect "hallucinated" responses or to altogether decline to even answer prompt at all. Specifically, it investigates the presence of gender-based biases in LLMs' responses to factual inquiries. This paper takes a multi-pronged approach to evaluating GPT models by evaluating fairness across multiple dimensions of recall, hallucinations and declinations. Our findings reveal discernible gender disparities in the responses generated by GPT-3.5. While advancements in GPT-4 have led to improvements in performance, they have not fully eradicated these gender disparities, notably in instances where responses are declined. The study further explores the origins of these disparities by examining the influence of gender associations in prompts and the homogeneity in the responses.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Obscured but Not Erased: Evaluating Nationality Bias in LLMs via Name-Based Bias Benchmarks
A name-substituted variant of the BBQ benchmark shows that LLMs retain nationality stereotypes even when explicit labels are removed, with smaller models showing more bias and lower accuracy.
-
LFTF: Locating First and Then Fine-Tuning for Mitigating Gender Bias in Large Language Models
A block-localizing fine-tuning method for gender debiasing is presented, but its stated loss is inconsistent with its reported behavior and the evaluation tables contain duplicate rows.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.