Bias in Large Language Models: Origin, Evaluation, and Mitigation

Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized natural language processing, but their susceptibility to biases poses significant challenges. This comprehensive review examines the landscape of bias in LLMs, from its origins to current mitigation strategies. We categorize biases as intrinsic and extrinsic, analyzing their manifestations in various NLP tasks. The review critically assesses a range of bias evaluation methods, including data-level, model-level, and output-level approaches, providing researchers with a robust toolkit for bias detection. We further explore mitigation strategies, categorizing them into pre-model, intra-model, and post-model techniques, highlighting their effectiveness and limitations. Ethical and legal implications of biased LLMs are discussed, emphasizing potential harms in real-world applications such as healthcare and criminal justice. By synthesizing current knowledge on bias in LLMs, this review contributes to the ongoing effort to develop fair and responsible AI systems. Our work serves as a comprehensive resource for researchers and practitioners working towards understanding, evaluating, and mitigating bias in LLMs, fostering the development of more equitable AI technologies.

Neural Automated Writing Evaluation with Corrective Feedback

The utilization of technology in second language learning and teaching has become ubiquitous. For the assessment of writing specifically, automated writing evaluation (AWE) and grammatical error correction (GEC) have become immensely popular and effective methods for enhancing writing proficiency and delivering instant and individualized feedback to learners. By leveraging the power of natural language processing (NLP) and machine learning algorithms, AWE and GEC systems have been developed separately to provide language learners with automated corrective feedback and more accurate and unbiased scoring that would otherwise be subject to examiners. In this paper, we propose an integrated system for automated writing evaluation with corrective feedback as a means of bridging the gap between AWE and GEC results for second language learners. This system enables language learners to simulate the essay writing tests: a student writes and submits an essay, and the system returns the assessment of the writing along with suggested grammatical error corrections. Given that automated scoring and grammatical correction are more efficient and cost-effective than human grading, this integrated system would also alleviate the burden of manually correcting innumerable essays.

Frustratingly Simple Prompting-based Text Denoising

This paper introduces a novel perspective on the automated essay scoring (AES) task, challenging the conventional view of the ASAP dataset as a static entity. Employing simple text denoising techniques using prompting, we explore the dynamic potential within the dataset. While acknowledging the previous emphasis on building regression systems, our paper underscores how making minor changes to a dataset through text denoising can enhance the final results.

Evaluating Prompting Strategies for Grammatical Error Correction Based on Language Proficiency

The writing examples of English language learners may be different from those of native speakers. Given that there is a significant differences in second language (L2) learners' error types by their proficiency levels, this paper attempts to reduce overcorrection by examining the interaction between LLM's performance and L2 language proficiency. Our method focuses on zero-shot and few-shot prompting and fine-tuning models for GEC for learners of English as a foreign language based on the different proficiency. We investigate GEC results and find that overcorrection happens primarily in advanced language learners' writing (proficiency C) rather than proficiency A (a beginner level) and proficiency B (an intermediate level). Fine-tuned LLMs, and even few-shot prompting with writing examples of English learners, actually tend to exhibit decreased recall measures. To make our claim concrete, we conduct a comprehensive examination of GEC outcomes and their evaluation results based on language proficiency.