Industry
Bias in Evaluation Processes: An Optimization-Based Model
Biases with respect to socially-salient attributes of individuals have been well documented in evaluation processes used in settings such as admissions and hiring. We view such an evaluation process as a transformation of a distribution of the true utility of an individual for a task to an observed distribution and model it as a solution to a loss minimization problem subject to an information constraint. Our model has two parameters that have been identified as factors leading to biases: the resource-information trade-off parameter in the information constraint and the risk-averseness parameter in the loss function. We characterize the distributions that arise from our model and study the effect of the parameters on the observed distribution. The outputs of our model enrich the class of distributions that can be used to capture variation across groups in the observed evaluations. We empirically validate our model by fitting real-world datasets and use it to study the effect of interventions in a downstream selection task. These results contribute to an understanding of the emergence of bias in evaluation processes and provide tools to guide the deployment of interventions to mitigate biases.
ALimitations and Societal
Limitations One limitation of our model is its potential for data bias. KOSMOS-1 is trained on a2 web-scale multimodal corpus, which means that it is likely to be biased towards the data that it was3 trained on. This could lead to the model generating text that is biased towards certain demographics4 or viewpoints.5 Another limitation of KOSMOS-1 is its relatively small size compared to other large language models.6 This means that the model may not be able to learn as complex relationships between different7 modalities. This could lead to the model making mistakes when it is asked to perform tasks that8 require a deep understanding of multiple modalities.9 Finally, KOSMOS-1 only supports vision modality.
In-Context Impersonation Reveals Large Language Models' Strengths and Biases
Leonard Salewski, Stephan Alaniz, Isabel Rio-Torto, Eric Schulz, Zeynep Akata
In everyday conversations, humans can take on different roles and adapt their vocabulary to their chosen roles. We explore whether LLMs can take on, that is impersonate, different roles when they generate text in-context. We ask LLMs to assume different personas before solving vision and language tasks. We do this by prefixing the prompt with a persona that is associated either with a social identity or domain expertise. In a multi-armed bandit task, we find that LLMs pretending to be children of different ages recover human-like developmental stages of exploration. In a language-based reasoning task, we find that LLMs impersonating domain experts perform better than LLMs impersonating non-domain experts.
Error Bounds for Learning with Vector-Valued Random Features
This paper provides a comprehensive error analysis of learning with vector-valued random features (RF). The theory is developed for RF ridge regression in a fully general infinite-dimensional input-output setting, but nonetheless applies to and improves existing finite-dimensional analyses. In contrast to comparable work in the literature, the approach proposed here relies on a direct analysis of the underlying risk functional and completely avoids the explicit RF ridge regression solution formula in terms of random matrices. This removes the need for concentration results in random matrix theory or their generalizations to random operators. The main results established in this paper include strong consistency of vector-valued RF estimators under model misspecification and minimax optimal convergence rates in the well-specified setting. The parameter complexity (number of random features) and sample complexity (number of labeled data) required to achieve such rates are comparable with Monte Carlo intuition and free from logarithmic factors.
e2cfb719f58585f779d0a4f9f07bd618-Supplemental-Datasets_and_Benchmarks.pdf
A.1 Creation of the Multimodal Web Document Dataset A.1.1 Collecting of a Large Number of HTMLFiles Our data collection process begins by considering the 25 most recent Common Crawl6 dumps available at the time of dataset creation. It contains webpages spanning from February 2020 to January/February 2023. We use a modified version of readability-lxml7 to extract the main text from the pages, discarding any pages that contain text of excessively high perplexity. This process yields a total of 41.2 billion documents. Selection of English content To identify non-English content, we apply the FastText classifier (Joulin et al., 2017) to the extracted text, e ectively filtering out 63.6% of the documents. Early text deduplication Often, a set of URLs is crawled repeatedly across di erent Common Crawl snapshots. However, the content of these websites may vary as web administrators make changes over time. Hence, at this stage, we refrain from deduplicating documents based on their URLs. Instead, we perform MinHash (Broder, 1997) deduplication with 16 hashes calculated over 5-grams. To further refine the data, we eliminate documents containing substantial proportions of repeated paragraphs and n-grams, employing the methodology described in MassiveText (Rae et al., 2022).