SEMar 3, 2023
MLTEing Models: Negotiating, Evaluating, and Documenting Model and System QualitiesKatherine R. Maffey, Kyle Dotterrer, Jennifer Niemann et al. · cmu
Many organizations seek to ensure that machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI) systems work as intended in production but currently do not have a cohesive methodology in place to do so. To fill this gap, we propose MLTE (Machine Learning Test and Evaluation, colloquially referred to as "melt"), a framework and implementation to evaluate ML models and systems. The framework compiles state-of-the-art evaluation techniques into an organizational process for interdisciplinary teams, including model developers, software engineers, system owners, and other stakeholders. MLTE tooling supports this process by providing a domain-specific language that teams can use to express model requirements, an infrastructure to define, generate, and collect ML evaluation metrics, and the means to communicate results.
CLJul 25, 2024
Examining the Influence of Political Bias on Large Language Model Performance in Stance ClassificationLynnette Hui Xian Ng, Iain Cruickshank, Roy Ka-Wei Lee
Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in executing tasks based on natural language queries. However, these models, trained on curated datasets, inherently embody biases ranging from racial to national and gender biases. It remains uncertain whether these biases impact the performance of LLMs for certain tasks. In this study, we investigate the political biases of LLMs within the stance classification task, specifically examining whether these models exhibit a tendency to more accurately classify politically-charged stances. Utilizing three datasets, seven LLMs, and four distinct prompting schemes, we analyze the performance of LLMs on politically oriented statements and targets. Our findings reveal a statistically significant difference in the performance of LLMs across various politically oriented stance classification tasks. Furthermore, we observe that this difference primarily manifests at the dataset level, with models and prompting schemes showing statistically similar performances across different stance classification datasets. Lastly, we observe that when there is greater ambiguity in the target the statement is directed towards, LLMs have poorer stance classification accuracy. Code & Dataset: http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.12938478
LGAug 15, 2024
RED-CT: A Systems Design Methodology for Using LLM-labeled Data to Train and Deploy Edge Classifiers for Computational Social ScienceDavid Farr, Nico Manzonelli, Iain Cruickshank et al.
Large language models (LLMs) have enhanced our ability to rapidly analyze and classify unstructured natural language data. However, concerns regarding cost, network limitations, and security constraints have posed challenges for their integration into work processes. In this study, we adopt a systems design approach to employing LLMs as imperfect data annotators for downstream supervised learning tasks, introducing novel system intervention measures aimed at improving classification performance. Our methodology outperforms LLM-generated labels in seven of eight tests, demonstrating an effective strategy for incorporating LLMs into the design and deployment of specialized, supervised learning models present in many industry use cases.
SIMar 18
Temporal Narrative Monitoring in Dynamic Information EnvironmentsDavid Farr, Stephen Prochaska, Jack Moody et al.
Comprehending the information environment (IE) during crisis events is challenging due to the rapid change and abstract nature of the domain. Many approaches focus on snapshots via classification methods or network approaches to describe the IE in crisis, ignoring the temporal nature of how information changed over time. This work presents a system-oriented framework for modeling emerging narratives as temporally evolving semantic structures without requiring prior label specification. By integrating semantic embeddings, density-based clustering, and rolling temporal linkage, the framework represents narratives as persistent yet adaptive entities within a shared semantic space. We apply the methodology to a real-world crisis event and evaluate system behavior through stratified cluster validation and temporal lifecycle analysis. Results demonstrate high cluster coherence and reveal heterogeneous narrative lifecycles characterized by both transient fragments and stable narrative anchors. We ground our approach in situational awareness theory, supporting perception and comprehension of the IE by transforming unstructured social media streams into interpretable, temporally structured representations. The resulting system provides a methodology for monitoring and decision support in dynamic information environments.
MAMay 7
The Cost of Consensus: Malignant Epistemic Herding and Adaptive Gating in Distributed Multi-Agent SearchDavid Farr, Iain Cruickshank, Kate Starbird et al.
Distributed agents in real-world settings frequently must coordinate under uncertainty with only partial observations. Coordination is necessary to share beliefs to aid in task completion, but communication costs bandwidth, introduces latency, and if done poorly, can degrade collective reasoning. This tension is especially acute in bandwidth-constrained deployments such as distributed sensing networks, autonomous reconnaissance, and collaborative cyber defense, where excessive transmission carries direct operational costs. Existing work has focused on multi-agent exploration and communication strategies, but not on how communication frequency and content jointly shape the collective belief state. Central to this challenge is the degree to which agents maintain compatible internal beliefs about the environment, a property we term \textit{epistemic alignment}. When agents share beliefs effectively, they converge on correct hypotheses; when communication is poorly designed, agents may converge confidently on wrong ones. We formalize this distinction and show it is not detectable from coordination metrics alone such as Jensen-Shannon Divergence or rate to consensus.
LGOct 16, 2024
LLM Chain Ensembles for Scalable and Accurate Data AnnotationDavid Farr, Nico Manzonelli, Iain Cruickshank et al.
The ability of large language models (LLMs) to perform zero-shot classification makes them viable solutions for data annotation in rapidly evolving domains where quality labeled data is often scarce and costly to obtain. However, the large-scale deployment of LLMs can be prohibitively expensive. This paper introduces an LLM chain ensemble methodology that aligns multiple LLMs in a sequence, routing data subsets to subsequent models based on classification uncertainty. This approach leverages the strengths of individual LLMs within a broader system, allowing each model to handle data points where it exhibits the highest confidence, while forwarding more complex cases to potentially more robust models. Our results show that the chain ensemble method often exceeds the performance of the best individual model in the chain and achieves substantial cost savings, making LLM chain ensembles a practical and efficient solution for large-scale data annotation challenges.
HCOct 16, 2024
LLM Confidence Evaluation Measures in Zero-Shot CSS ClassificationDavid Farr, Iain Cruickshank, Nico Manzonelli et al.
Assessing classification confidence is critical for leveraging large language models (LLMs) in automated labeling tasks, especially in the sensitive domains presented by Computational Social Science (CSS) tasks. In this paper, we make three key contributions: (1) we propose an uncertainty quantification (UQ) performance measure tailored for data annotation tasks, (2) we compare, for the first time, five different UQ strategies across three distinct LLMs and CSS data annotation tasks, (3) we introduce a novel UQ aggregation strategy that effectively identifies low-confidence LLM annotations and disproportionately uncovers data incorrectly labeled by the LLMs. Our results demonstrate that our proposed UQ aggregation strategy improves upon existing methods andcan be used to significantly improve human-in-the-loop data annotation processes.
CLJun 16, 2024
DocNet: Semantic Structure in Inductive Bias Detection ModelsJessica Zhu, Iain Cruickshank, Michel Cukier
News will be biased so long as people have opinions. As social media becomes the primary entry point for news and partisan differences increase, it is increasingly important for informed citizens to be able to recognize bias. If people are aware of the biases of the news they consume, they will be able to take action to avoid polarizing echo chambers. In this paper, we explore an often overlooked aspect of bias detection in media: the semantic structure of news articles. We present DocNet, a novel, inductive, and low-resource document embedding and political bias detection model. We also demonstrate that the semantic structure of news articles from opposing political sides, as represented in document-level graph embeddings, have significant similarities. DocNet bypasses the need for pre-trained language models, reducing resource dependency while achieving comparable performance. It can be used to advance political bias detection in low-resource environments. Our code and data are made available at: https://anonymous.4open.science/r/DocNet/
SISep 2, 2021
Coordinating Narratives and the Capitol Riots on ParlerLynnette Hui Xian Ng, Iain Cruickshank, Kathleen M. Carley
Coordinated disinformation campaigns are used to influence social media users, potentially leading to offline violence. In this study, we introduce a general methodology to uncover coordinated messaging through analysis of user parleys on Parler. The proposed method constructs a user-to-user coordination network graph induced by a user-to-text graph and a text-to-text similarity graph. The text-to-text graph is constructed based on the textual similarity of Parler posts. We study three influential groups of users in the 6 January 2020 Capitol riots and detect networks of coordinated user clusters that are all posting similar textual content in support of different disinformation narratives related to the U.S. 2020 elections.