arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2401.08511cs.CL
收藏

偏见评估与去偏中预训练与下游设置之间的差距

The Gaps between Pre-train and Downstream Settings in Bias Evaluation and Debiasing

MBZUAI(穆罕默德·本·扎耶德人工智能大学);University of Liverpool(利物浦大学);Amazon(亚马逊)

Masahiro Kaneko, Danushka Bollegala, Timothy Baldwin

AI总结:

本文研究预训练语言模型在微调与上下文学习两种去偏设置下的偏见评估差距,证明基于上下文学习的去偏方法在内在与外在偏见分数上相关性更高,且下游任务性能损失更小。

摘要:

预训练语言模型(PLM)的输出倾向在微调(FT)前后因模型参数的更新而发生显著变化。这些输出倾向的差异导致PLM的社会偏见出现差距。例如,在基于FT的去偏方法下,PLM的内在偏见分数与其外在偏见分数之间相关性较低。此外,对PLM应用基于FT的去偏方法会导致下游任务性能下降。另一方面,在大规模数据集上训练的PLM可以通过使用提示的上下文学习(ICL)在不更新参数的情况下进行学习。与基于FT的去偏方法相比,ICL对PLM产生的变化更小。因此,我们假设在预训练模型和FT模型中观察到的差距对于使用ICL的去偏方法并不成立。在本研究中,我们证明与基于FT的方法相比,基于ICL的去偏方法在内在偏见分数和外在偏见分数之间表现出更高的相关性。此外,与FT情况相比,ICL情况下由去偏引起的性能下降也更低。

英文摘要:

The output tendencies of Pre-trained Language Models (PLM) vary markedly before and after Fine-Tuning (FT) due to the updates to the model parameters. These divergences in output tendencies result in a gap in the social biases of PLMs. For example, there exits a low correlation between intrinsic bias scores of a PLM and its extrinsic bias scores under FT-based debiasing methods. Additionally, applying FT-based debiasing methods to a PLM leads to a decline in performance in downstream tasks. On the other hand, PLMs trained on large datasets can learn without parameter updates via In-Context Learning (ICL) using prompts. ICL induces smaller changes to PLMs compared to FT-based debiasing methods. Therefore, we hypothesize that the gap observed in pre-trained and FT models does not hold true for debiasing methods that use ICL. In this study, we demonstrate that ICL-based debiasing methods show a higher correlation between intrinsic and extrinsic bias scores compared to FT-based methods. Moreover, the performance degradation due to debiasing is also lower in the ICL case compared to that in the FT case.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑