Safeguarding LLMs
1. Safeguarding LLMs
Almost there! Let's wrap up by discussing some challenges and practical ethical considerations associated with LLMs.2. LLM challenges
Because of their sophistication, LLMs face both common challenges faced by any AI system and some unique to their complexity. One challenge involves ensuring global accessibility by supporting multi-languages. This involves addressing language diversity, resource availability, and ensuring models can effectively adapt to different languages. Another issue is balancing the benefits of open-access LLMs with the risks of exposing proprietary information or enabling misuse. Scaling LLMs requires improving their ability to represent languages while managing increased computational demands, training costs, and the need for large datasets. Bias is also a significant concern. If the training data are biased, the models may learn and replicate unfair patterns in their understanding and generation of language.3. Truthfulness and hallucinations
Another major challenge for LLMs is hallucination; when the model generates false or nonsensical information as if it were accurate. For example, in discussing nuclear energy benefits, a model might hallucinate by presenting incorrect details. Reducing hallucinations involves training on diverse, balanced data to avoid one-sided perspectives, using bias audits and mitigation techniques like re-sampling, and fine-tuning the model for sensitive topics. Prompt engineering can further enhance reliability.4. Truthfulness and hallucinations
It is the process of crafting and refining prompts to obtain accurate model responses. It helps mitigate hallucinations by framing prompts to encourage balanced, evidence-based outputs.5. Metrics for analyzing LLM bias: toxicity
The evaluate library offers metrics for identifying and addressing biased LLM outputs. Toxicity quantifies language toxicity by using a pre-trained classification LLM for detecting hate speech. It takes a list of one or more texts as input, and calculates a toxicity score between 0 and 1 per input, or returns the maximum of the inputs' toxicity scores if the argument 'aggregation="maximum"' is specified. Alternatively, it can also return the percentage of input predictions with a toxicity score above 0.5.6. Metrics for analyzing LLM bias: regard
Another metric is regard, aimed at quantifying language polarity and biased perception towards certain demographics or groups. Let's examine two lists of LLM outputs linked to two employee groups based on nationality. These outputs may perpetuate bias against certain groups in the workplace. Let's see what the regard metric says about this. We calculate the regard scores for each group separately.7. Metrics for analyzing LLM bias: regard
The two text sequences associated with the first group show a predominantly positive polarity, as opposed to a negligible negative polarity. By contrast, analyzing the sequences under the second group shows a strongly negative polarity.8. Let's practice!
Let's explore this further with some final exercises.Create Your Free Account
or
By continuing, you accept our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy and that your data is stored in the USA.