With the rapid evolution of large language models (LLMs), new and hard-to-predict harmful capabilities are emerging. This requires developers to identify potential risks through the evaluation of “dangerous capabilities” in order to responsibly deploy LLMs. Here we aim to facilitate this process. In particular, we collect an open-source dataset to evaluate the safeguards in LLMs, to facilitate the deployment of safer open-source LLMs at a low cost. Our dataset is curated and filtered to consist only of instructions that responsible language models should not follow. We assess the responses of six popular LLMs to these instructions, and we find that simple BERT-style classifiers can achieve results that are comparable to GPT-4 on automatic safety evaluation. Our data and code are available at https://github.com/Libr-AI/do-not-answer

Many studies have demonstrated that large language models (LLMs) can produce harmful responses, exposing users to unexpected risks. Previous studies have proposed comprehensive taxonomies of LLM risks, as well as corresponding prompts that can be used to examine LLM safety. However, the focus has been almost exclusively on English. We aim to broaden LLM safety research by introducing a dataset for the safety evaluation of Chinese LLMs, and extending it to better identify false negative and false positive examples in terms of risky prompt rejections. We further present a set of fine-grained safety assessment criteria for each risk type, facilitating both manual annotation and automatic evaluation in terms of LLM response harmfulness. Our experiments over five LLMs show that region-specific risks are the prevalent risk type. Warning: this paper contains example data that may be offensive, harmful, or biased. Our data is available at https://github.com/Libr-AI/do-not-answer.

Instruction tuning significantly enhances the performance of large language models (LLMs) across various tasks. However, the procedure to optimizing the mixing of instruction datasets for LLM fine-tuning is still poorly understood. This study categorizes instructions into three primary types: NLP downstream tasks, coding, and general chat. We explore the effects of instruction tuning on different combinations of datasets on LLM performance, and find that certain instruction types are more advantageous for specific applications but can negatively impact other areas. This work provides insights into instruction mixtures, laying the foundations for future research.

Modern NLP systems exhibit a range of biases, which a growing literature on model debiasing attempts to correct. However, current progress is hampered by a plurality of definitions of bias, means of quantification, and oftentimes vague relation between debiasing algorithms and theoretical measures of bias. This paper seeks to clarify the current situation and plot a course for meaningful progress in fair learning, with two key contributions: (1) making clear inter-relations among the current gamut of methods, and their relation to fairness theory; and (2) addressing the practical problem of model selection, which involves a trade-off between fairness and accuracy and has led to systemic issues in fairness research. Putting them together, we make several recommendations to help shape future work.

Mitigating bias in training on biased datasets is an important open problem. Several techniques have been proposed, however the typical evaluation regime is very limited, considering very narrow data conditions. For instance, the effect of target class imbalance and stereotyping is under-studied. To address this gap, we examine the performance of various debiasing methods across multiple tasks, spanning binary classification (Twitter sentiment), multi-class classification (profession prediction), and regression (valence prediction). Through extensive experimentation, we find that data conditions have a strong influence on relative model performance, and that general conclusions cannot be drawn about method efficacy when evaluating only on standard datasets, as is current practice in fairness research.

With the growing prevalence of large-scale language models, their energy footprint and potential to learn and amplify historical biases are two pressing challenges. Dataset distillation (DD) — a method for reducing the dataset size by learning a small number of synthetic samples which encode the information in the original dataset — is a method for reducing the cost of model training, however its impact on fairness has not been studied. We investigate how DD impacts on group bias, with experiments over two language classification tasks, concluding that vanilla DD preserves the bias of the dataset. We then show how existing debiasing methods can be combined with DD to produce models that are fair and accurate, at reduced training cost.

Group bias in natural language processing tasks manifests as disparities in system error rates across texts authorized by different demographic groups, typically disadvantaging minority groups. Dataset balancing has been shown to be effective at mitigating bias, however existing approaches do not directly account for correlations between author demographics and linguistic variables, limiting their effectiveness. To achieve Equal Opportunity fairness, such as equal job opportunity without regard to demographics, this paper introduces a simple, but highly effective, objective for countering bias using balanced training.We extend the method in the form of a gated model, which incorporates protected attributes as input, and show that it is effective at reducing bias in predictions through demographic input perturbation, outperforming all other bias mitigation techniques when combined with balanced training.

This paper presents FairLib, an open-source python library for assessing and improving model fairness. It provides a systematic framework for quickly accessing benchmark datasets, reproducing existing debiasing baseline models, developing new methods, evaluating models with different metrics, and visualizing their results. Its modularity and extensibility enable the framework to be used for diverse types of inputs, including natural language, images, and audio. We implement 14 debiasing methods, including pre-processing,at-training-time, and post-processing approaches. The built-in metrics cover the most commonly acknowledged fairness criteria and can be further generalized and customized for fairness evaluation.

NLP technologies can cause unintended harms if learned representations encode sensitive attributes of the author, or predictions systematically vary in quality across groups. Popular debiasing approaches, like adversarial training, remove sensitive information from representations in order to reduce disparate performance, however the relation between representational fairness and empirical (performance) fairness has not been systematically studied. This paper fills this gap, and proposes a novel debiasing method building on contrastive learning to encourage a latent space that separates instances based on target label, while mixing instances that share protected attributes. Our results show the effectiveness of our new method and, more importantly, show across a set of diverse debiasing methods that representational fairness does not imply empirical fairness. This work highlights the importance of aligning and understanding the relation of the optimization objective and final fairness target.

Real-world datasets often encode stereotypes and societal biases. Such biases can be implicitly captured by trained models, leading to biased predictions and exacerbating existing societal preconceptions. Existing debiasing methods, such as adversarial training and removing protected information from representations, have been shown to reduce bias. However, a disconnect between fairness criteria and training objectives makes it difficult to reason theoretically about the effectiveness of different techniques. In this work, we propose two novel training objectives which directly optimise for the widely-used criterion of equal opportunity, and show that they are effective in reducing bias while maintaining high performance over two classification tasks.

Adversarial learning can learn fairer and less biased models of language processing than standard training. However, current adversarial techniques only partially mitigate the problem of model bias, added to which their training procedures are often unstable. In this paper, we propose a novel approach to adversarial learning based on the use of multiple diverse discriminators, whereby discriminators are encouraged to learn orthogonal hidden representations from one another. Experimental results show that our method substantially improves over standard adversarial removal methods, in terms of reducing bias and stability of training.

Bias is pervasive for NLP models, motivating the development of automatic debiasing techniques. Evaluation of NLP debiasing methods has largely been limited to binary attributes in isolation, e.g., debiasing with respect to binary gender or race, however many corpora involve multiple such attributes, possibly with higher cardinality. In this paper we argue that a truly fair model must consider ‘gerrymandering’ groups which comprise not only single attributes, but also intersectional groups. We evaluate a form of bias-constrained model which is new to NLP, as well an extension of the iterative nullspace projection technique which can handle multiple identities.

Grounding is crucial for natural language understanding. An important subtask is to understand modified color expressions, such as “light blue”. We present a model of color modifiers that, compared with previous additive models in RGB space, learns more complex transformations. In addition, we present a model that operates in the HSV color space. We show that certain adjectives are better modeled in that space. To account for all modifiers, we train a hard ensemble model that selects a color space depending on the modifier-color pair. Experimental results show significant and consistent improvements compared to the state-of-the-art baseline model.