Skylar Lu

Ze Wang, Zekun Wu, Jeremy Zhang et al.

Model collapse, a phenomenon characterized by performance degradation due to iterative training on synthetic data, has been widely studied. However, its implications for bias amplification, the progressive intensification of pre-existing societal biases in Large Language Models (LLMs), remain significantly underexplored, despite the growing influence of LLMs in shaping online discourse. In this paper, we introduce a open, generational, and long-context benchmark specifically designed to measure political bias amplification in LLMs, leveraging sentence continuation tasks derived from a comprehensive dataset of U.S. political news. Our empirical study using GPT-2 reveals consistent and substantial political bias intensification (e.g., right-leaning amplification) over iterative synthetic training cycles. We evaluate three mitigation strategies, Overfitting, Preservation, and Accumulation, and demonstrate that bias amplification persists independently of model collapse, even when the latter is effectively controlled. Furthermore, we propose a mechanistic analysis approach that identifies neurons correlated with specific phenomena during inference through regression and statistical tests. This analysis uncovers largely distinct neuron populations driving bias amplification and model collapse, underscoring fundamentally different underlying mechanisms. Finally, we supplement our empirical findings with theoretical intuition that explains the separate origins of these phenomena, guiding targeted strategies for bias mitigation.

Ze Wang, Zekun Wu, Xin Guan et al.

The use of Large Language Models (LLMs) in hiring has led to legislative actions to protect vulnerable demographic groups. This paper presents a novel framework for benchmarking hierarchical gender hiring bias in Large Language Models (LLMs) for resume scoring, revealing significant issues of reverse gender hiring bias and overdebiasing. Our contributions are fourfold: Firstly, we introduce a new construct grounded in labour economics, legal principles, and critiques of current bias benchmarks: hiring bias can be categorized into two types: Level bias (difference in the average outcomes between demographic counterfactual groups) and Spread bias (difference in the variance of outcomes between demographic counterfactual groups); Level bias can be further subdivided into statistical bias (i.e. changing with non-demographic content) and taste-based bias (i.e. consistent regardless of non-demographic content). Secondly, the framework includes rigorous statistical and computational hiring bias metrics, such as Rank After Scoring (RAS), Rank-based Impact Ratio, Permutation Test, and Fixed Effects Model. Thirdly, we analyze gender hiring biases in ten state-of-the-art LLMs. Seven out of ten LLMs show significant biases against males in at least one industry. An industry-effect regression reveals that the healthcare industry is the most biased against males. Moreover, we found that the bias performance remains invariant with resume content for eight out of ten LLMs. This indicates that the bias performance measured in this paper might apply to other resume datasets with different resume qualities. Fourthly, we provide a user-friendly demo and resume dataset to support the adoption and practical use of the framework, which can be generalized to other social traits and tasks.