The reviewed record of science sign in
Pith

arxiv: 2306.01943 · v1 · pith:SGVLNURE · submitted 2023-06-02 · cs.CL · cs.CY· cs.HC

NLPositionality: Characterizing Design Biases of Datasets and Models

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

classification cs.CL cs.CYcs.HC
keywords datasetsmodelsbiasesdesignpositionalitynlpositionalityacrossalignment
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

Design biases in NLP systems, such as performance differences for different populations, often stem from their creator's positionality, i.e., views and lived experiences shaped by identity and background. Despite the prevalence and risks of design biases, they are hard to quantify because researcher, system, and dataset positionality is often unobserved. We introduce NLPositionality, a framework for characterizing design biases and quantifying the positionality of NLP datasets and models. Our framework continuously collects annotations from a diverse pool of volunteer participants on LabintheWild, and statistically quantifies alignment with dataset labels and model predictions. We apply NLPositionality to existing datasets and models for two tasks -- social acceptability and hate speech detection. To date, we have collected 16,299 annotations in over a year for 600 instances from 1,096 annotators across 87 countries. We find that datasets and models align predominantly with Western, White, college-educated, and younger populations. Additionally, certain groups, such as non-binary people and non-native English speakers, are further marginalized by datasets and models as they rank least in alignment across all tasks. Finally, we draw from prior literature to discuss how researchers can examine their own positionality and that of their datasets and models, opening the door for more inclusive NLP 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. 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.

  2. Can Data Work be Reparative?

    cs.CY 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Ethnographic study of feminist civic-tech data work argues reparative AI dataset production requires resetting accountability ties to center those harmed by current practices.

  3. Framing an AI with Values Reduces AI Reliance in AI-supported Writing Tasks

    cs.HC 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    An online experiment finds that showing users an overview of an AI's values reduces reliance on AI suggestions during writing tasks.

  4. Inertia in Moral and Value Judgments of Large Language Models

    cs.CL 2024-08 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    LLMs exhibit persistent inertia in value orientations, with harm avoidance and fairness remaining skewed across persona prompts.