Models trained on real-world data tend to imitate and amplify social biases. Common methods to mitigate biases require prior information on the types of biases that should be mitigated (e.g., gender or racial bias) and the social groups associated with each data sample. In this work, we introduce BLIND, a method for bias removal with no prior knowledge of the demographics in the dataset. While training a model on a downstream task, BLIND detects biased samples using an auxiliary model that predicts the main model’s success, and down-weights those samples during the training process. Experiments with racial and gender biases in sentiment classification and occupation classification tasks demonstrate that BLIND mitigates social biases without relying on a costly demographic annotation process. Our method is competitive with other methods that require demographic information and sometimes even surpasses them.

Considerable efforts to measure and mitigate gender bias in recent years have led to the introduction of an abundance of tasks, datasets, and metrics used in this vein. In this position paper, we assess the current paradigm of gender bias evaluation and identify several flaws in it. First, we highlight the importance of extrinsic bias metrics that measure how a model’s performance on some task is affected by gender, as opposed to intrinsic evaluations of model representations, which are less strongly connected to specific harms to people interacting with systems. We find that only a few extrinsic metrics are measured in most studies, although more can be measured. Second, we find that datasets and metrics are often coupled, and discuss how their coupling hinders the ability to obtain reliable conclusions, and how one may decouple them. We then investigate how the choice of the dataset and its composition, as well as the choice of the metric, affect bias measurement, finding significant variations across each of them. Finally, we propose several guidelines for more reliable gender bias evaluation.

Common studies of gender bias in NLP focus either on extrinsic bias measured by model performance on a downstream task or on intrinsic bias found in models’ internal representations. However, the relationship between extrinsic and intrinsic bias is relatively unknown. In this work, we illuminate this relationship by measuring both quantities together: we debias a model during downstream fine-tuning, which reduces extrinsic bias, and measure the effect on intrinsic bias, which is operationalized as bias extractability with information-theoretic probing. Through experiments on two tasks and multiple bias metrics, we show that our intrinsic bias metric is a better indicator of debiasing than (a contextual adaptation of) the standard WEAT metric, and can also expose cases of superficial debiasing. Our framework provides a comprehensive perspective on bias in NLP models, which can be applied to deploy NLP systems in a more informed manner. Our code and model checkpoints are publicly available.