Fine-tuning pre-trained language models on downstream tasks with varying random seeds has been shown to be unstable, especially on small datasets. Many previous studies have investigated this instability and proposed methods to mitigate it. However, most of these studies only used the standard deviation of performance scores (SD) as their measure, which is a narrow characterization of instability. In this paper, we analyze SD and six other measures quantifying instability of different granularity levels. Moreover, we propose a systematic evaluation framework of these measures’ validity. Finally, we analyze the consistency and difference between different measures by reassessing existing instability mitigation methods. We hope our results will inform better measurements of the fine-tuning instability.

Knowledge base (KB) embeddings have been shown to contain gender biases. In this paper, we study two questions regarding these biases: how to quantify them, and how to trace their origins in KB? Specifically, first, we develop two novel bias measures respectively for a group of person entities and an individual person entity. Evidence of their validity is observed by comparison with real-world census data. Second, we use the influence function to inspect the contribution of each triple in KB to the overall group bias. To exemplify the potential applications of our study, we also present two strategies (by adding and removing KB triples) to mitigate gender biases in KB embeddings.

Various measures have been proposed to quantify human-like social biases in word embeddings. However, bias scores based on these measures can suffer from measurement error. One indication of measurement quality is reliability, concerning the extent to which a measure produces consistent results. In this paper, we assess three types of reliability of word embedding gender bias measures, namely test-retest reliability, inter-rater consistency and internal consistency. Specifically, we investigate the consistency of bias scores across different choices of random seeds, scoring rules and words. Furthermore, we analyse the effects of various factors on these measures’ reliability scores. Our findings inform better design of word embedding gender bias measures. Moreover, we urge researchers to be more critical about the application of such measures

Personalised response generation enables generating human-like responses by means of assigning the generator a social identity. However, pragmatics theory suggests that human beings adjust the way of speaking based on not only who they are but also whom they are talking to. In other words, when modelling personalised dialogues, it might be favourable if we also take the listener’s social identity into consideration. To validate this idea, we use gender as a typical example of a social variable to investigate how the listener’s identity influences the language used in Chinese dialogues on social media. Also, we build personalised generators. The experiment results demonstrate that the listener’s identity indeed matters in the language use of responses and that the response generator can capture such differences in language use. More interestingly, by additionally modelling the listener’s identity, the personalised response generator performs better in its own identity.

Word embeddings have been widely used to study gender stereotypes in texts. One key problem regarding existing bias scores is to evaluate their validities: do they really reflect true bias levels? For a small set of words (e.g. occupations), we can rely on human annotations or external data. However, for most words, evaluating the correctness of them is still an open problem. In this work, we utilize word association test, which contains rich types of word connections annotated by human participants, to explore how gender stereotypes spread within our minds. Specifically, we use random walk on word association graph to derive bias scores for a large amount of words. Experiments show that these bias scores correlate well with bias in the real world. More importantly, comparing with word-embedding-based bias scores, it provides a different perspective on gender stereotypes in words.