| Challenge: | Existing machine reading systems fail to answer What did Elizabeth want? correctly in the context of ‘My kingdom for a cough drop, cried Queen Elizabeth.’ Biased by co-occurrence statistics in the training data of pretrained language models, systems predict my kingdom, rather than a lung drop. |
| Approach: | They propose to use a dataset to quantify belief bias in machine reading based on pre-trained language models to examine the pervasiveness of belief bias. |
| Outcome: | The proposed dataset shows that machine reading models fail when contexts do not align with common beliefs. |
Similar Papers
Do LLMs Align Human Values Regarding Social Biases? Judging and Explaining Social Biases with LLMs (2025.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large language models can lead to undesired consequences when misaligned with human values . previous studies have shown misalignment of LLMs with human value using expert-designed or agent-based emulated bias scenarios . |
| Approach: | They investigate whether large language models (LLMs) are misaligned with human values . they find no significant differences in understanding of HVSB between LLMs . |
| Outcome: | The results show that large language models do not have lower misalignment rates and attack success rates . the study also shows that smaller language models have the ability to explain HVSB . |
Bias and Fairness in Natural Language Processing (D19-2)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | a tutorial will review the history of bias and fairness studies in machine learning and language processing . |
| Approach: | This tutorial reviews the history of bias and fairness studies in machine learning and language processing . it presents recent community effort to quantify and mitigat bias in natural language processing models . |
| Outcome: | This tutorial reviews the history of bias and fairness studies in machine learning and language processing . it aims to quantify and mitigate bias in natural language processing models for a wide spectrum of tasks . |
Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Machine Reading for Question Answering (D19-58)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | a workshop focuses on machine reading for question answering . despite recent progress, there is much to be desired about these datasets and systems . |
| Approach: | This year, they present a shared task on machine reading for question answering . they adapt and unified 18 distinct question answering datasets into the same format . |
| Outcome: | The proposed system achieves an average F1 score of 72.5 on the held-out datasets. |
When Do Decompositions Help for Machine Reading? (2023.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing work on decompositions of complex questions has focused on multi-step reasoning . but, in machine reading, it is unclear when decomposing is helpful . |
| Approach: | They conduct experiments on decompositions in machine reading to unify recent work . they find that decomposing complex questions can be helpful in zero or limited-data settings . |
| Outcome: | The proposed model can learn decompositions implicitly even with limited data, the study shows . the results are consistent with previous work on decomposing complex questions . |
A Peek into Token Bias: Large Language Models Are Not Yet Genuine Reasoners (2024.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
Bowen Jiang, Yangxinyu Xie, Zhuoqun Hao, Xiaomeng Wang, Tanwi Mallick, Weijie Su, Camillo Taylor, Dan Roth
| Challenge: | a new hypothesis-testing framework is developed to assess whether large language models possess genuine reasoning abilities or primarily depend on token bias. |
| Approach: | They propose a framework to assess whether large language models have genuine reasoning abilities or primarily depend on token bias. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework outlines a list of hypotheses where token biases are readily identifiable . the results suggest that most LLMs still struggle with logical reasoning . |
Cognitive Effects and Biases in Large Language Models (2026.eacl-tutorials)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | This tutorial bridges psychology and NLP to clarify cognitive effects and biases in large language models. |
| Approach: | This tutorial bridges psychology and NLP to clarify cognitive effects and biases in large language models. |
| Outcome: | This tutorial bridges psychology and NLP to clarify cognitive effects and biases in large language models. |
Do Neural Language Models Overcome Reporting Bias? (2020.coling-main)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent studies show that pre-trained language models can overcome reporting bias by estimating the plausibility of rare but unspoken facts. |
| Approach: | They revisit the experiments conducted by Gordon and Van Durme (2013) . they find that pre-trained language models overestimate the very rare . |
| Outcome: | The proposed approach overestimates the rare at the expense of the rare, while minimizing reporting bias. |
Mind Your Bias: A Critical Review of Bias Detection Methods for Contextual Language Models (2022.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing methods for detection of biases in contextual language models are inconsistent and inconclusive. |
| Approach: | They propose to use word embedding association test to detect biases in contextual language models to compare them with other methods. |
| Outcome: | The proposed methods are inconsistent and inconclusive for language models with word embeddings. |
Bias in the Mirror : Are LLMs opinions robust to their own adversarial attacks (2025.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing work on large language models lacks robustness, highlighting the limitations of such models. |
| Approach: | They propose a novel approach where two LLMs engage in self-debate to persuade a neutral version of the model. |
| Outcome: | The proposed approach examines whether large language models are robust during interactions and whether they are susceptible to reinforcing misinformation or shifting to harmful viewpoints. |
Identifying Bias in Machine-generated Text Detection (2026.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | a growing number of generative AI systems are detecting text generated by a model or written by . humans perform poorly at the detection task, but show no significant biases on the studied attributes. |
| Approach: | They examine gender, race/ethnicity, English-language learner status, and economic status . they find several models tend to classify disadvantaged groups as machine-generated . |
| Outcome: | The proposed models show strong performance but can cause negative impacts . the models classify disadvantaged groups as machine-generated, while economically disadvantaged students' essays are less likely to be classified as machine generated . |