MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200633747 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v36i11.21443

Word Embeddings via Causal Inference: Gender Bias Reducing and Semantic Information Preserving

2022· article· en· W4200633747 on OpenAlexafffund
Lei Ding, Dengdeng Yu, Jinhan Xie, Wenxing Guo, Shenggang Hu, Meichen Liu, Linglong Kong, Hongsheng Dai, Yanchun Bao, Bei Jiang

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNatural Language Processing Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersEconomic and Social Research CouncilSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDebiasingComputer scienceWord (group theory)Natural language processingArtificial intelligenceInferenceCausal inferenceFocus (optics)Semantic similarityOracleCognitive psychologyPsychologyLinguisticsCognitive scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With widening deployments of natural language processing (NLP) in daily life, inherited social biases from NLP models have become more severe and problematic. Previous studies have shown that word embeddings trained on human-generated corpora have strong gender biases that can produce discriminative results in downstream tasks. Previous debiasing methods focus mainly on modeling bias and only implicitly consider semantic information while completely overlooking the complex underlying causal structure among bias and semantic components. To address these issues, we propose a novel methodology that leverages a causal inference framework to effectively remove gender bias. The proposed method allows us to construct and analyze the complex causal mechanisms facilitating gender information flow while retaining oracle semantic information within word embeddings. Our comprehensive experiments show that the proposed method achieves state-of-the-art results in gender-debiasing tasks. In addition, our methods yield better performance in word similarity evaluation and various extrinsic downstream NLP tasks.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.241 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicNatural Language Processing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207