mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Mitigating Biases of Large Language Models in Stance Detection with Counterfactual Augmented Calibration

arXiv 2402.14296 ↗First posted 22 Feb 2024cs.CLcited by 5

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Stance detection is critical for understanding the underlying position or attitude expressed toward a topic. Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated significant advancements across various natural language processing tasks including stance detection, however, their performance in stance detection is limited by biases and spurious correlations inherent due to their data-driven nature. Our statistical experiment reveals that LLMs are prone to generate biased stances due to sentiment-stance spurious correlations and preference towards certain individuals and topics. Furthermore, the results demonstrate a strong negative correlation between stance bias and stance detection performance, underscoring the importance of mitigating bias to enhance the utility of LLMs in stance detection. Therefore, in this paper, we propose a Counterfactual Augmented Calibration Network (FACTUAL), which a novel calibration network is devised to calibrate potential bias in the stance prediction of LLMs. Further, to address the challenge of effectively learning bias representations and the difficulty in the generalizability of debiasing, we construct counterfactual augmented data. This approach enhances the calibration network, facilitating the debiasing and out-of-domain generalization. Experimental results on in-target and zero-shot stance detection tasks show that the proposed FACTUAL can effectively mitigate biases of LLMs, achieving state-of-the-art results.

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 47 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 22 Feb 2024.

Builds on

19 of 47 references.

References · 19

  1. 2023LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Modelscited by 13,958
  2. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,266
  3. 2022Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Modelscited by 5,601
  4. 2023An Empirical Study of Catastrophic Forgetting in Large Language Models During Continual Fine-tuningcited by 622
  5. 2023Large Language Models Are Not Robust Multiple Choice Selectorscited by 454
  6. 2020BERTweet: A pre-trained language model for English Tweetscited by 346
  7. 2020Zero-Shot Stance Detection: A Dataset and Model using Generalized Topic Representationscited by 97
  8. 2022How would Stance Detection Techniques Evolve after the Launch of ChatGPT?cited by 76
  9. 2023Stance Detection with Collaborative Role-Infused LLM-Based Agentscited by 53
  10. 2023Explore Spurious Correlations at the Concept Level in Language Models for Text Classificationcited by 48
  11. 2020Stance Detection in Web and Social Media: A Comparative Studycited by 25
  12. 2023Debiasing Algorithm through Model Adaptationcited by 24
7 more
  1. 2022Infusing Knowledge from Wikipedia to Enhance Stance Detectioncited by 20
  2. 2023Understanding the Effect of Model Compression on Social Bias in Large Language Modelscited by 19
  3. 2023Co2PT: Mitigating Bias in Pre-trained Language Models through Counterfactual Contrastive Prompt Tuningcited by 15
  4. 2018Explaining Controversy on Social Media via Stance Summarizationcited by 9
  5. 2022Debiasing Stance Detection Models with Counterfactual Reasoning and Adversarial Bias Learningcited by 5
  6. 2023Inducing Political Bias Allows Language Models Anticipate Partisan Reactions to Controversiescited by 4
  7. 2023A Logically Consistent Chain-of-Thought Approach for Stance Detectioncited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 4.

5 papers.