Information design (ID) explores how a sender influence the optimal behavior of receivers to achieve specific objectives. While ID originates from everyday human communication, existing game-theoretic and machine learning methods often model information structures as numbers, which limits many applications to toy games. This work leverages LLMs and proposes a verbalized framework in Bayesian persuasion (BP), which extends classic BP to real-world games involving human dialogues for the first time. Specifically, we map the BP to a verbalized mediator-augmented extensive-form game, where LLMs instantiate the sender and receiver. To efficiently solve the verbalized game, we propose a generalized equilibrium-finding algorithm combining LLM and game solver. The algorithm is reinforced with techniques including verbalized commitment assumptions, verbalized obedience constraints, and information obfuscation. Numerical experiments in dialogue scenarios, such as recommendation letters, courtroom interactions, and law enforcement, validate that our framework can both reproduce theoretical results in classic BP and discover effective persuasion strategies in more complex natural language and multi-stage scenarios.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have recently emerged as an effective tool to assist individuals in writing various types of content, including professional documents such as recommendation letters. Though bringing convenience, this application also introduces unprecedented fairness concerns. Model-generated reference letters might be directly used by users in professional scenarios. If underlying biases exist in these model-constructed letters, using them without scrutinization could lead to direct societal harms, such as sabotaging application success rates for female applicants. In light of this pressing issue, it is imminent and necessary to comprehensively study fairness issues and associated harms in this real-world use case. In this paper, we critically examine gender biases in LLM-generated reference letters. Drawing inspiration from social science findings, we design evaluation methods to manifest biases through 2 dimensions: (1) biases in language style and (2) biases in lexical content. We further investigate the extent of bias propagation by analyzing the hallucination bias of models, a term that we define to be bias exacerbation in model-hallucinated contents. Through benchmarking evaluation on 2 popular LLMs- ChatGPT and Alpaca, we reveal significant gender biases in LLM-generated recommendation letters. Our findings not only warn against using LLMs for this application without scrutinization, but also illuminate the importance of thoroughly studying hidden biases and harms in LLM-generated professional documents.

University admission at many highly selective institutions uses a holistic review process, where all aspects of the application, including protected attributes (e.g., race, gender), grades, essays, and recommendation letters are considered, to compose an excellent and diverse class. In this study, we empirically evaluate how influential protected attributes are for predicting admission decisions using a machine learning (ML) model, and in how far textual information (e.g., personal essay, teacher recommendation) may substitute for the loss of protected attributes in the model. Using data from 14,915 applicants to an undergraduate admission office at a selective U.S. institution in the 2022-2023 cycle, we find that the exclusion of protected attributes from the ML model leads to substantially reduced admission-prediction performance. The inclusion of textual information via both a TF-IDF representation and a Latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA) model partially restores model performance, but does not appear to provide a full substitute for admitting a similarly diverse class. In particular, while the text helps with gender diversity, the proportion of URM applicants is severely impacted by the exclusion of protected attributes, and the inclusion of new attributes generated from the textual information does not recover this performance loss.

That's what the software concluded about a student's paper. One of the professors in the academic program I direct had come across this finding and asked me what to do with it. Then another one saw the same result--100 percent AI--for a different paper by that student, and also wondered: What does this mean? The problem breaks down into more problems: whether it's possible to know for certain that a student used AI, what it even means to "use" AI for writing papers, and when that use amounts to cheating. The software that had flagged our student's papers was also multilayered: Canvas, our courseware system, was running Turnitin, a popular plagiarism-detection service, which had recently installed a new AI-detection algorithm.

I was lunching with a group of fellow professors, and, as happens these days when we assemble, generative artificial intelligence was discussed. Are your students using it? What are you doing to prevent cheating? Heads were shaken in chagrin as iced teas were sipped for comfort. But then, one of my colleagues wondered: Could he use AI to generate a reference letter for a student?

I studied in depth how to be successful in my PhD applications and it paid off: I got admitted to Stanford, University of Washington, UCL, CMU, and NYU. This blog post is a mish-mash of how to proceed in your PhD applications from A to Z. It discusses what is important and what is not. It discusses application materials like the statement of purpose (SoP) and how to make sense of these application materials. There are some excellent sources out there on this topic and it is worth stopping for a second and understand what this blog post will give you and what other sources can give you. This blog post is mainly focused on PhD applications for deep learning and related fields like natural language processing, computer vision, reinforcement learning, and other sub-fields of deep learning. This blog post assumes that you already have a relatively strong profile, meaning you probably have already one or multiple publications under your belt and you worked with more than one person on research. This blog post is designed to help you optimize your chance for success for top programs.

Please attach one file in ."pdf" Please attach one file in ".pdf" containing your letter of interest (Max. Please attach the Statement of past and proposed future research (2-3 pages) in .pdf The reference letters shall be submitted directly by the referees. Each referee you indicate in this form shall automatically receive an e-mail with instructions to submit the recommendation letter to BCAM.