REVIEW 4 cited by
Mitigating Gender Bias in Code Large Language Models via Model Editing
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
In recent years, with the maturation of large language model (LLM) technology and the emergence of high-quality programming code datasets, researchers have become increasingly confident in addressing the challenges of program synthesis automatically. However, since most of the training samples for LLMs are unscreened, it is inevitable that LLMs' performance may not align with real-world scenarios, leading to the presence of social bias. To evaluate and quantify the gender bias in code LLMs, we propose a dataset named CodeGenBias (Gender Bias in the Code Generation) and an evaluation metric called FB-Score (Factual Bias Score) based on the actual gender distribution of correlative professions. With the help of CodeGenBias and FB-Score, we evaluate and analyze the gender bias in eight mainstream Code LLMs. Previous work has demonstrated that model editing methods that perform well in knowledge editing have the potential to mitigate social bias in LLMs. Therefore, we develop a model editing approach named MG-Editing (Multi-Granularity model Editing), which includes the locating and editing phases. Our model editing method MG-Editing can be applied at five different levels of model parameter granularity: full parameters level, layer level, module level, row level, and neuron level. Extensive experiments not only demonstrate that our MG-Editing can effectively mitigate the gender bias in code LLMs while maintaining their general code generation capabilities, but also showcase its excellent generalization. At the same time, the experimental results show that, considering both the gender bias of the model and its general code generation capability, MG-Editing is most effective when applied at the row and neuron levels of granularity.
Forward citations
Cited by 4 Pith papers
-
How Reasoning Shapes Social Bias in LLM-Generated Code?
Reasoning before code generation lowers the average bias rate in LLM-generated code from 0.64 to 0.40, and a new probe-based method (ProbeDebias) cuts bias by about 84% while keeping quality nearly unchanged.
-
Biased or Personalized? The Impact of Personal Information on AI-driven Development
Changing only the prompter's age and gender in AI coding prompts produces statistically significant differences in generated website interface design, template content, and code structure across 800 generated websites...
-
FairCoder: Probing LLM Bias in High-Stakes Decision Making via Coding Tasks
A new code-generation benchmark finds that LLMs display measurable social bias in decision-making code, with more bias in test-case generation and around attributes like income and age.
-
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). Continue with ORCID to comment.