Machine learning (ML) currently exerts an outsized influence on the world, increasingly affecting communities and institutional practices. It is therefore critical that we question vague conceptions of the field as value-neutral or universally beneficial, and investigate what specific values the field is advancing. In this paper, we present a rigorous examination of the values of the field by quantitatively and qualitatively analyzing 100 highly cited ML papers published at premier ML conferences, ICML and NeurIPS. We annotate key features of papers which reveal their values: how they justify their choice of project, which aspects they uplift, their consideration of potential negative consequences, and their institutional affiliations and funding sources. We find that societal needs are typically very loosely connected to the choice of project, if mentioned at all, and that consideration of negative consequences is extremely rare. We identify 67 values that are uplifted in machine learning research, and, of these, we find that papers most frequently justify and assess themselves based on performance, generalization, efficiency, researcher understanding, novelty, and building on previous work. We present extensive textual evidence and analysis of how these values are operationalized. Notably, we find that each of these top values is currently being defined and applied with assumptions and implications generally supporting the centralization of power. Finally, we find increasingly close ties between these highly cited papers and tech companies and elite universities.

As language models are trained on ever more text, researchers are turning to some of the largest corpora available. Unlike most other types of datasets in NLP, large unlabeled text corpora are often presented with minimal documentation, and best practices for documenting them have not been established. In this work we provide the first documentation for the Colossal Clean Crawled Corpus (C4; Raffel et al., 2020), a dataset created by applying a set of filters to a single snapshot of Common Crawl. We begin with a high-level summary of the data, including distributions of where the text came from and when it was written. We then give more detailed analysis on salient parts of this data, including the most frequent sources of text (e.g., patents.google.com, which contains a significant percentage of machine translated and/or OCR'd text), the effect that the filters had on the data (they disproportionately remove text in AAE), and evidence that some other benchmark NLP dataset examples are contained in the text. We release a web interface to an interactive, indexed copy of this dataset, encouraging the community to continuously explore and report additional findings.