Rogério Abreu de Paula

Maysa M. Garcia de Macedo, Wyatt Clarke, Eli Lucherini et al.

Rapid technological innovation threatens to leave much of the global workforce behind. Today's economy juxtaposes white-hot demand for skilled labor against stagnant employment prospects for workers unprepared to participate in a digital economy. It is a moment of peril and opportunity for every country, with outcomes measured in long-term capital allocation and the life satisfaction of billions of workers. To meet the moment, governments and markets must find ways to quicken the rate at which the supply of skills reacts to changes in demand. More fully and quickly understanding labor market intelligence is one route. In this work, we explore the utility of time series forecasts to enhance the value of skill demand data gathered from online job advertisements. This paper presents a pipeline which makes one-shot multi-step forecasts into the future using a decade of monthly skill demand observations based on a set of recurrent neural network methods. We compare the performance of a multivariate model versus a univariate one, analyze how correlation between skills can influence multivariate model results, and present predictions of demand for a selection of skills practiced by workers in the information technology industry.

Tiago Machado, Maysa Malfiza Garcia de Macedo, Rogerio Abreu de Paula et al.

This work aims to investigate how different Large Language Models (LLMs) alignment methods affect the models' responses to prompt attacks. We selected open source models based on the most common alignment methods, namely, Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT), Direct Preference Optimization (DPO), and Reinforcement Learning with Human Feedback (RLHF). We conducted a systematic analysis using statistical methods to verify how sensitive the Attack Success Rate (ASR) is when we apply variations to prompts designed to elicit inappropriate content from LLMs. Our results show that even small prompt modifications can significantly change the Attack Success Rate (ASR) according to the statistical tests we run, making the models more or less susceptible to types of attack. Critically, our results demonstrate that running existing 'attack benchmarks' alone may not be sufficient to elicit all possible vulnerabilities of both models and alignment methods. This paper thus contributes to ongoing efforts on model attack evaluation by means of systematic and statistically-based analyses of the different alignment methods and how sensitive their ASR is to prompt variation.

Weiyan Shi, Ryan Li, Yutong Zhang et al.

To enhance language models' cultural awareness, we design a generalizable pipeline to construct cultural knowledge bases from different online communities on a massive scale. With the pipeline, we construct CultureBank, a knowledge base built upon users' self-narratives with 12K cultural descriptors sourced from TikTok and 11K from Reddit. Unlike previous cultural knowledge resources, CultureBank contains diverse views on cultural descriptors to allow flexible interpretation of cultural knowledge, and contextualized cultural scenarios to help grounded evaluation. With CultureBank, we evaluate different LLMs' cultural awareness, and identify areas for improvement. We also fine-tune a language model on CultureBank: experiments show that it achieves better performances on two downstream cultural tasks in a zero-shot setting. Finally, we offer recommendations based on our findings for future culturally aware language technologies. The project page is https://culturebank.github.io . The code and model is at https://github.com/SALT-NLP/CultureBank . The released CultureBank dataset is at https://huggingface.co/datasets/SALT-NLP/CultureBank .

Heloisa Candello, Muneeza Azmat, Uma Sushmitha Gunturi et al.

With the rapid uptake of generative AI, investigating human perceptions of generated responses has become crucial. A major challenge is their `aptitude' for hallucinating and generating harmful contents. Despite major efforts for implementing guardrails, human perceptions of these mitigation strategies are largely unknown. We conducted a mixed-method experiment for evaluating the responses of a mitigation strategy across multiple-dimensions: faithfulness, fairness, harm-removal capacity, and relevance. In a within-subject study design, 57 participants assessed the responses under two conditions: harmful response plus its mitigation and solely mitigated response. Results revealed that participants' native language, AI work experience, and annotation familiarity significantly influenced evaluations. Participants showed high sensitivity to linguistic and contextual attributes, penalizing minor grammar errors while rewarding preserved semantic contexts. This contrasts with how language is often treated in the quantitative evaluation of LLMs. We also introduced new metrics for training and evaluating mitigation strategies and insights for human-AI evaluation studies.

Swapnaja Achintalwar, Adriana Alvarado Garcia, Ateret Anaby-Tavor et al. · ibm-research

Large language models (LLMs) are susceptible to a variety of risks, from non-faithful output to biased and toxic generations. Due to several limiting factors surrounding LLMs (training cost, API access, data availability, etc.), it may not always be feasible to impose direct safety constraints on a deployed model. Therefore, an efficient and reliable alternative is required. To this end, we present our ongoing efforts to create and deploy a library of detectors: compact and easy-to-build classification models that provide labels for various harms. In addition to the detectors themselves, we discuss a wide range of uses for these detector models - from acting as guardrails to enabling effective AI governance. We also deep dive into inherent challenges in their development and discuss future work aimed at making the detectors more reliable and broadening their scope.

Prashanth Vijayaraghavan, Soroush Vosoughi, Lamogha Chiazor et al.

Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have revolutionized natural language processing (NLP) and expanded their applications across diverse domains. However, despite their impressive capabilities, LLMs have been shown to reflect and perpetuate harmful societal biases, including those based on ethnicity, gender, and religion. A critical and underexplored issue is the reinforcement of caste-based biases, particularly towards India's marginalized caste groups such as Dalits and Shudras. In this paper, we address this gap by proposing DECASTE, a novel, multi-dimensional framework designed to detect and assess both implicit and explicit caste biases in LLMs. Our approach evaluates caste fairness across four dimensions: socio-cultural, economic, educational, and political, using a range of customized prompting strategies. By benchmarking several state-of-the-art LLMs, we reveal that these models systematically reinforce caste biases, with significant disparities observed in the treatment of oppressed versus dominant caste groups. For example, bias scores are notably elevated when comparing Dalits and Shudras with dominant caste groups, reflecting societal prejudices that persist in model outputs. These results expose the subtle yet pervasive caste biases in LLMs and emphasize the need for more comprehensive and inclusive bias evaluation methodologies that assess the potential risks of deploying such models in real-world contexts.