Towards Robust NLG Bias Evaluation with Syntactically-diverse Prompts
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
We present a robust methodology for evaluating biases in natural language generation(NLG) systems. Previous works use fixed hand-crafted prefix templates with mentions of various demographic groups to prompt models to generate continuations for bias analysis. These fixed prefix templates could themselves be specific in terms of styles or linguistic structures, which may lead to unreliable fairness conclusions that are not representative of the general trends from tone varying prompts. To study this problem, we paraphrase the prompts with different syntactic structures and use these to evaluate demographic bias in NLG systems. Our results suggest similar overall bias trends but some syntactic structures lead to contradictory conclusions compared to past works. We show that our methodology is more robust and that some syntactic structures prompt more toxic content while others could prompt less biased generation. This suggests the importance of not relying on a fixed syntactic structure and using tone-invariant prompts. Introducing syntactically-diverse prompts can achieve more robust NLG (bias) evaluation.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 28 of its 34 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 3 Dec 2022.
Builds on
28 of 34 references.
References · 28
- 2019BART: Denoising Sequence-to-Sequence Pre-training for Natural Language Generation, Translation, and Comprehensioncited by 5,874
- 2021Prefix-Tuning: Optimizing Continuous Prompts for Generationcited by 3,878
- 2021Pre-train, Prompt, and Predict: A Systematic Survey of Prompting Methods in Natural Language Processingcited by 2,222
- 2019A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Machine Learningcited by 1,911
- 2016Man is to Computer Programmer as Woman is to Homemaker? Debiasing Word Embeddingscited by 1,304
- 2020Multilingual Denoising Pre-training for Neural Machine Translationcited by 1,028
- 2019DialoGPT: Large-Scale Generative Pre-training for Conversational Response Generationcited by 842
- 2021GPT Understands, Toocited by 715
- 2018Gender Bias in Coreference Resolution: Evaluation and Debiasing Methodscited by 657
- 2019The Woman Worked as a Babysitter: On Biases in Language Generationcited by 540
- 2020Pre-trained Models for Natural Language Processing: A Surveycited by 504
- 2018Gender Bias in Coreference Resolutioncited by 438
16 more
- 2021Learning How to Ask: Querying LMs with Mixtures of Soft Promptscited by 376
- 2018Gender Bias in Neural Natural Language Processingcited by 210
- 2021Societal Biases in Language Generation: Progress and Challengescited by 201
- 2021RedditBias: A Real-World Resource for Bias Evaluation and Debiasing of Conversational Language Modelscited by 149
- 2018Assessing Gender Bias in Machine Translation -- A Case Study with Google Translatecited by 121
- 2020A Knowledge-Enhanced Pretraining Model for Commonsense Story Generationcited by 116
- 2020Towards Controllable Biases in Language Generationcited by 112
- 2017Ethical Challenges in Data-Driven Dialogue Systemscited by 86
- 2021On the Safety of Conversational Models: Taxonomy, Dataset, and Benchmarkcited by 73
- 2022Prompt-and-Rerank: A Method for Zero-Shot and Few-Shot Arbitrary Textual Style Transfer with Small Language Modelscited by 49
- 2019Examining Gender Bias in Languages with Grammatical Gendercited by 40
- 2021Revealing Persona Biases in Dialogue Systemscited by 33
- 2022Deconstructing NLG Evaluation: Evaluation Practices, Assumptions, and Their Implicationscited by 32
- 2022Can Prompt Probe Pretrained Language Models? Understanding the Invisible Risks from a Causal Viewcited by 31
- 2020Defining and Evaluating Fair Natural Language Generationcited by 17
- 2022Towards Understanding Gender-Seniority Compound Bias in Natural Language Generationcited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2023: 3; 2024: 2; 2025: 1; 2026: 1.
7 papers.
- 2023The Curious Decline of Linguistic Diversity: Training Language Models on Synthetic Textcited by 97
- 2023Evaluating Large Language Models on Controlled Generation Taskscited by 73
- 2024Benchmarking Linguistic Diversity of Large Language Modelscited by 37
- 2023Benchmarking and Explaining Large Language Model-based Code Generation: A Causality-Centric Approachcited by 15
- 2025Social Bias Benchmark for Generation: A Comparison of Generation and QA-Based Evaluationscited by 14
- 2024Quite Good, but Not Enough: Nationality Bias in Large Language Models -- A Case Study of ChatGPTcited by 13
- 2026Limited Linguistic Diversity in Embodied AI Datasetscited by 5
- 2026Limited Linguistic Diversity in Embodied AI Datasets6 Jan 2026
- 2025Social Bias Benchmark for Generation: A Comparison of Generation and QA-Based Evaluations10 Mar 2025
- 2024Benchmarking Linguistic Diversity of Large Language Models13 Dec 2024
- 2024Quite Good, but Not Enough: Nationality Bias in Large Language Models -- A Case Study of ChatGPT11 May 2024
- 2023The Curious Decline of Linguistic Diversity: Training Language Models on Synthetic Text16 Nov 2023
- 2023Evaluating Large Language Models on Controlled Generation Tasks23 Oct 2023
- 2023Benchmarking and Explaining Large Language Model-based Code Generation: A Causality-Centric Approach10 Oct 2023