Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Supporting Human-AI Collaboration in Auditing LLMs with LLMs

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

arxiv 2304.09991 v3 pith:C4TIA2LL submitted 2023-04-19 cs.HC cs.AIcs.CL

classification cs.HCcs.AIcs.CL
keywords auditinglanguagemodelsadatesthuman-aitoolanalysisbeen
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large language models are becoming increasingly pervasive and ubiquitous in society via deployment in sociotechnical systems. Yet these language models, be it for classification or generation, have been shown to be biased and behave irresponsibly, causing harm to people at scale. It is crucial to audit these language models rigorously. Existing auditing tools leverage either or both humans and AI to find failures. In this work, we draw upon literature in human-AI collaboration and sensemaking, and conduct interviews with research experts in safe and fair AI, to build upon the auditing tool: AdaTest (Ribeiro and Lundberg, 2022), which is powered by a generative large language model (LLM). Through the design process we highlight the importance of sensemaking and human-AI communication to leverage complementary strengths of humans and generative models in collaborative auditing. To evaluate the effectiveness of the augmented tool, AdaTest++, we conduct user studies with participants auditing two commercial language models: OpenAI's GPT-3 and Azure's sentiment analysis model. Qualitative analysis shows that AdaTest++ effectively leverages human strengths such as schematization, hypothesis formation and testing. Further, with our tool, participants identified a variety of failures modes, covering 26 different topics over 2 tasks, that have been shown before in formal audits and also those previously under-reported.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. IntelliAudit: Using Large Language Models to Evaluate Audit Controls

    cs.AI 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A retrieval-grounded multi-agent LLM system for ISO 27001 evidence review receives mostly positive but mixed ratings from practicing auditors on simulated organizations.

Pith tools