Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Literature Review
Literature Review
Literature Review
Literature Review
Literature Review
Research Year
Paper Title Paper Link Description Comments
Questions Published
Untitled
Literature Review 1
Research Year
Paper Title Paper Link Description
Questions Published Comments
Literature Review 2
Research Year
Paper Title Paper Link Description Comments
Questions Published
training For occupation
transfer into classification, they
harmful fine-tuned using a
task- scrubbed dataset in
specific which pronouns were
behavior not given. Downstream
after fine- bias was calculated
tuning. using true positive rate
(low for “surgeons”),
and upstream bias
using pronoun ranking
bias (difference in log
probabilities for
she/her and he/him).
For toxicity
classification, it used
online comments
marked by humans as
toxic/non-toxic as the
fine-tuning dataset.
Mentions of certain
identity groups are
more likely to be
flagged as toxic. For
measuring upstream
bias, they found the 20
most likely tokens for
MASK in {identity}
{person} is [MASK],
and did a sentiment
analysis. They
measured this subject
to 4 interventions: no
pre-training, andom
perturbations, bias
mitigation(SentDebias),
re-balancing and
scrubbing fine-tuning
dataset. Their results
were : 1) Upstream
variations have little
impact on downstream
bias. 2)Most
downstream bias is
explained by the fine-
tuning step. 3)Re-
sampling and re-
scrubbing has little
effect on downstream
behavior.
How Gender
Debiasing
Affects Internal just
Model https://aclanthology.org/2022.naacl-main.188/ 2022 skimmed
Representations, it
and Why It
Matters
Literature Review 3
Research Year
Paper Title Paper Link Description
Questions Published Comments
Mitigating
Gender Bias in
Natural
literature
Language https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1906/1906.08976.pdf 2019
review
Processing:
Literature
Review
Literature Review 4