Ze Wang
2025
SAGED: A Holistic Bias-Benchmarking Pipeline for Language Models with Customisable Fairness Calibration
Xin Guan
|
Nate Demchak
|
Saloni Gupta
|
Ze Wang
|
Ediz Ertekin Jr.
|
Adriano Koshiyama
|
Emre Kazim
|
Zekun Wu
Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Computational Linguistics
The development of unbiased large language models is widely recognized as crucial, yet existing benchmarks fall short in detecting biases due to limited scope, contamination, and lack of a fairness baseline. SAGED(bias) is the first holistic benchmarking pipeline to address these problems. The pipeline encompasses five core stages: scraping materials, assembling benchmarks, generating responses, extracting numeric features, and diagnosing with disparity metrics. SAGED includes metrics for max disparity, such as impact ratio, and bias concentration, such as Max Z-scores. Noticing that metric tool bias and contextual bias in prompts can distort evaluation, SAGED implements counterfactual branching and baseline calibration for mitigation. For demonstration, we use SAGED on G20 Countries with popular 8b-level models including Gemma2, Llama3.1, Mistral, and Qwen2. With sentiment analysis, we find that while Mistral and Qwen2 show lower max disparity and higher bias concentration than Gemma2 and Llama3.1, all models are notably biased against countries like Russia and (except for Qwen2) China. With further experiments to have models role-playing U.S. presidents, we see bias amplifies and shifts in heterogeneous directions. Moreover, we see Qwen2 and Mistral not engage in role-playing, while Llama3.1 and Gemma2 role-play Trump notably more intensively than Biden and Harris, indicating role-playing performance bias in these models.
2024
JobFair: A Framework for Benchmarking Gender Hiring Bias in Large Language Models
Ze Wang
|
Zekun Wu
|
Xin Guan
|
Michael Thaler
|
Adriano Koshiyama
|
Skylar Lu
|
Sachin Beepath
|
Ediz Ertekin
|
Maria Perez-Ortiz
Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2024
The use of Large Language Models (LLMs) in hiring has led to legislative actions to protect vulnerable demographic groups. This paper presents a novel framework for benchmarking hierarchical gender hiring bias in Large Language Models (LLMs) for resume scoring, revealing significant issues of reverse gender hiring bias and overdebiasing. Our contributions are fourfold: Firstly, we introduce a new construct grounded in labour economics, legal principles, and critiques of current bias benchmarks: hiring bias can be categorized into two types: Level bias (difference in the average outcomes between demographic counterfactual groups) and Spread bias (difference in the variance of outcomes between demographic counterfactual groups); Level bias can be further subdivided into statistical bias (i.e. changing with non-demographic content) and taste-based bias (i.e. consistent regardless of non-demographic content). Secondly, the framework includes rigorous statistical and computational hiring bias metrics, such as Rank After Scoring (RAS), Rank-based Impact Ratio, Permutation Test, and Fixed Effects Model. Thirdly, we analyze gender hiring biases in ten state-of-the-art LLMs. Seven out of ten LLMs show significant biases against males in at least one industry. An industry-effect regression reveals that the healthcare industry is the most biased against males. Moreover, we found that the bias performance remains invariant with resume content for eight out of ten LLMs. This indicates that the bias performance measured in this paper might apply to other resume datasets with different resume qualities. Fourthly, we provide a user-friendly demo and resume dataset to support the adoption and practical use of the framework, which can be generalized to other social traits and tasks.
Search
Fix data
Co-authors
- Xin Guan 2
- Adriano Koshiyama 2
- Zekun Wu 2
- Sachin Beepath 1
- Nate Demchak 1
- show all...