Abstract:With fairness concerns gaining significant attention in Machine Learning (ML), several bias mitigation techniques have been proposed, often compared against each other to find the best method. These benchmarking efforts tend to use a common setup for evaluation under the assumption that providing a uniform environment ensures a fair comparison. However, bias mitigation techniques are sensitive to hyperparameter choices, random seeds, feature selection, etc., meaning that comparison on just one setting can unfairly favour certain algorithms. In this work, we show significant variance in fairness achieved by several algorithms and the influence of the learning pipeline on fairness scores. We highlight that most bias mitigation techniques can achieve comparable performance, given the freedom to perform hyperparameter optimization, suggesting that the choice of the evaluation parameters-rather than the mitigation technique itself-can sometimes create the perceived superiority of one method over another. We hope our work encourages future research on how various choices in the lifecycle of developing an algorithm impact fairness, and trends that guide the selection of appropriate algorithms.
Abstract:In an effort to mitigate the harms of large language models (LLMs), learning from human feedback (LHF) has been used to steer LLMs towards outputs that are intended to be both less harmful and more helpful. Despite the widespread adoption of LHF in practice, the quality of this feedback and its effectiveness as a safety mitigation technique remain unclear. This study addresses these issues by auditing the widely-used Helpful and Harmless (HH) dataset by Anthropic. Our work includes: (1) a thorough investigation of the dataset's content through both manual and automated evaluation; (2) experiments demonstrating the dataset's impact on models' safety; and (3) an analysis of the 100 most influential papers citing this dataset. Through our audit, we showcase how conceptualization failures and quality issues identified in the HH dataset can create additional harms by leading to disparate safety behaviors across demographic groups. Our findings highlight the need for more nuanced, context-sensitive approaches to safety mitigation in LLMs.
Abstract:Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used as alternatives to traditional search engines given their capacity to generate text that resembles human language. However, this shift is concerning, as LLMs often generate hallucinations, misleading or false information that appears highly credible. In this study, we explore the phenomenon of hallucinations across multiple languages in freeform text generation, focusing on what we call multilingual hallucination gaps. These gaps reflect differences in the frequency of hallucinated answers depending on the prompt and language used. To quantify such hallucinations, we used the FactScore metric and extended its framework to a multilingual setting. We conducted experiments using LLMs from the LLaMA, Qwen, and Aya families, generating biographies in 19 languages and comparing the results to Wikipedia pages. Our results reveal variations in hallucination rates, especially between high and low resource languages, raising important questions about LLM multilingual performance and the challenges in evaluating hallucinations in multilingual freeform text generation.
Abstract:Recent advances in parameter-efficient fine-tuning methods, such as Low Rank Adaptation (LoRA), have gained significant attention for their ability to efficiently adapt large foundational models to various downstream tasks. These methods are appreciated for achieving performance comparable to full fine-tuning on aggregate-level metrics, while significantly reducing computational costs. To systematically address fairness in LLMs previous studies fine-tune on fairness specific data using a larger LoRA rank than typically used. In this paper, we introduce FairLoRA, a novel fairness-specific regularizer for LoRA aimed at reducing performance disparities across data subgroups by minimizing per-class variance in loss. To the best of our knowledge, we are the first to introduce a fairness based finetuning through LoRA. Our results demonstrate that the need for higher ranks to mitigate bias is not universal; it depends on factors such as the pre-trained model, dataset, and task. More importantly, we systematically evaluate FairLoRA across various vision models, including ViT, DiNO, and CLIP, in scenarios involving distribution shifts. We further emphasize the necessity of using multiple fairness metrics to obtain a holistic assessment of fairness, rather than relying solely on the metric optimized during training.
Abstract:As large language models (LLMs) become increasingly deployed across various industries, concerns regarding their reliability, particularly due to hallucinations-outputs that are factually inaccurate or irrelevant to user input-have grown. Our research investigates the relationship between the training process and the emergence of hallucinations to address a key gap in existing research that focuses primarily on post hoc detection and mitigation strategies. Using models from the Pythia suite (70M-12B parameters) and several hallucination detection metrics, we analyze hallucination trends throughout training and explore LLM internal dynamics. We introduce SEnsitive Neuron Dropout (SeND), a novel training protocol designed to mitigate hallucinations by reducing variance during training. SeND achieves this by deterministically dropping neurons with significant variability on a dataset, referred to as Sensitive Neurons. In addition, we develop an unsupervised hallucination detection metric, Efficient EigenScore (EES), which approximates the traditional EigenScore in 2x speed. This efficient metric is integrated into our protocol, allowing SeND to be both computationally scalable and effective at reducing hallucinations. Our empirical evaluation demonstrates that our approach improves LLM reliability at test time by up to 40% compared to normal training while also providing an efficient method to improve factual accuracy when adapting LLMs to domains such as Wikipedia and Medical datasets.
Abstract:A significant approach in natural language processing involves large-scale pre-training on general domain data followed by adaptation to specific tasks or domains. As models grow in size, full fine-tuning all parameters becomes increasingly impractical. To address this, some methods for low-rank task adaptation of language models have been proposed, e.g. LoRA and FLoRA. These methods keep the pre-trained model weights fixed and incorporate trainable low-rank decomposition matrices into some layers of the transformer architecture, called adapters. This approach significantly reduces the number of trainable parameters required for downstream tasks compared to full fine-tuning all parameters. In this work, we look at low-rank adaptation from the lens of data privacy. We show theoretically that the low-rank adaptation used in LoRA and FLoRA is equivalent to injecting some random noise into the batch gradients w.r.t the adapter parameters coming from their full fine-tuning, and we quantify the variance of the injected noise. By establishing a Berry-Esseen type bound on the total variation distance between the noise distribution and a Gaussian distribution with the same variance, we show that the dynamics of LoRA and FLoRA are very close to differentially private full fine-tuning the adapters, which suggests that low-rank adaptation implicitly provides privacy w.r.t the fine-tuning data. Finally, using Johnson-Lindenstrauss lemma, we show that when augmented with gradient clipping, low-rank adaptation is almost equivalent to differentially private full fine-tuning adapters with a fixed noise scale.
Abstract:Deep generative models learn continuous representations of complex data manifolds using a finite number of samples during training. For a pre-trained generative model, the common way to evaluate the quality of the manifold representation learned, is by computing global metrics like Fr\'echet Inception Distance using a large number of generated and real samples. However, generative model performance is not uniform across the learned manifold, e.g., for \textit{foundation models} like Stable Diffusion generation performance can vary significantly based on the conditioning or initial noise vector being denoised. In this paper we study the relationship between the \textit{local geometry of the learned manifold} and downstream generation. Based on the theory of continuous piecewise-linear (CPWL) generators, we use three geometric descriptors - scaling ($\psi$), rank ($\nu$), and complexity ($\delta$) - to characterize a pre-trained generative model manifold locally. We provide quantitative and qualitative evidence showing that for a given latent, the local descriptors are correlated with generation aesthetics, artifacts, uncertainty, and even memorization. Finally we demonstrate that training a \textit{reward model} on the local geometry can allow controlling the likelihood of a generated sample under the learned distribution.
Abstract:Measuring personal disclosures made in human-chatbot interactions can provide a better understanding of users' AI literacy and facilitate privacy research for large language models (LLMs). We run an extensive, fine-grained analysis on the personal disclosures made by real users to commercial GPT models, investigating the leakage of personally identifiable and sensitive information. To understand the contexts in which users disclose to chatbots, we develop a taxonomy of tasks and sensitive topics, based on qualitative and quantitative analysis of naturally occurring conversations. We discuss these potential privacy harms and observe that: (1) personally identifiable information (PII) appears in unexpected contexts such as in translation or code editing (48% and 16% of the time, respectively) and (2) PII detection alone is insufficient to capture the sensitive topics that are common in human-chatbot interactions, such as detailed sexual preferences or specific drug use habits. We believe that these high disclosure rates are of significant importance for researchers and data curators, and we call for the design of appropriate nudging mechanisms to help users moderate their interactions.
Abstract:Language models are prone to memorizing large parts of their training data, making them vulnerable to extraction attacks. Existing research on these attacks remains limited in scope, often studying isolated trends rather than the real-world interactions with these models. In this paper, we revisit extraction attacks from an adversarial perspective, exploiting the brittleness of language models. We find significant churn in extraction attack trends, i.e., even minor, unintuitive changes to the prompt, or targeting smaller models and older checkpoints, can exacerbate the risks of extraction by up to $2-4 \times$. Moreover, relying solely on the widely accepted verbatim match underestimates the extent of extracted information, and we provide various alternatives to more accurately capture the true risks of extraction. We conclude our discussion with data deduplication, a commonly suggested mitigation strategy, and find that while it addresses some memorization concerns, it remains vulnerable to the same escalation of extraction risks against a real-world adversary. Our findings highlight the necessity of acknowledging an adversary's true capabilities to avoid underestimating extraction risks.
Abstract:The rise of foundation models holds immense promise for advancing AI, but this progress may amplify existing risks and inequalities, leaving marginalized communities behind. In this position paper, we discuss that disparities towards marginalized communities - performance, representation, privacy, robustness, interpretability and safety - are not isolated concerns but rather interconnected elements of a cascading disparity phenomenon. We contrast foundation models with traditional models and highlight the potential for exacerbated disparity against marginalized communities. Moreover, we emphasize the unique threat of cascading impacts in foundation models, where interconnected disparities can trigger long-lasting negative consequences, specifically to the people on the margin. We define marginalized communities within the machine learning context and explore the multifaceted nature of disparities. We analyze the sources of these disparities, tracing them from data creation, training and deployment procedures to highlight the complex technical and socio-technical landscape. To mitigate the pressing crisis, we conclude with a set of calls to action to mitigate disparity at its source.