REVIEW 1 cited by
Implicit Bias in LLMs: A Survey
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
Due to the implement of guardrails by developers, Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated exceptional performance in explicit bias tests. However, bias in LLMs may occur not only explicitly, but also implicitly, much like humans who consciously strive for impartiality yet still harbor implicit bias. The unconscious and automatic nature of implicit bias makes it particularly challenging to study. This paper provides a comprehensive review of the existing literature on implicit bias in LLMs. We begin by introducing key concepts, theories and methods related to implicit bias in psychology, extending them from humans to LLMs. Drawing on the Implicit Association Test (IAT) and other psychological frameworks, we categorize detection methods into three primary approaches: word association, task-oriented text generation and decision-making. We divide our taxonomy of evaluation metrics for implicit bias into two categories: single-value-based metrics and comparison-value-based metrics. We classify datasets into two types: sentences with masked tokens and complete sentences, incorporating datasets from various domains to reflect the broad application of LLMs. Although research on mitigating implicit bias in LLMs is still limited, we summarize existing efforts and offer insights on future challenges. We aim for this work to serve as a clear guide for researchers and inspire innovative ideas to advance exploration in this task.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Conversational AI as a Catalyst for Informal Learning: An Empirical Large-Scale Study on LLM Use in Everyday Learning
Most adults in a German Prolific sample report using large language models for informal learning, with four distinct learner profiles emerging from their usage patterns.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.