Investigating Markers and Drivers of Gender Bias in Machine Translations
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Implicit gender bias in Large Language Models (LLMs) is a well-documented problem, and implications of gender introduced into automatic translations can perpetuate real-world biases. However, some LLMs use heuristics or post-processing to mask such bias, making investigation difficult. Here, we examine bias in LLMss via back-translation, using the DeepL translation API to investigate the bias evinced when repeatedly translating a set of 56 Software Engineering tasks used in a previous study. Each statement starts with 'she', and is translated first into a 'genderless' intermediate language then back into English; we then examine pronoun-choice in the back-translated texts. We expand prior research in the following ways: (1) by comparing results across five intermediate languages, namely Finnish, Indonesian, Estonian, Turkish and Hungarian; (2) by proposing a novel metric for assessing the variation in gender implied in the repeated translations, avoiding the over-interpretation of individual pronouns, apparent in earlier work; (3) by investigating sentence features that drive bias; (4) and by comparing results from three time-lapsed datasets to establish the reproducibility of the approach. We found that some languages display similar patterns of pronoun use, falling into three loose groups, but that patterns vary between groups; this underlines the need to work with multiple languages. We also identify the main verb appearing in a sentence as a likely significant driver of implied gender in the translations. Moreover, we see a good level of replicability in the results, and establish that our variation metric proves robust despite an obvious change in the behaviour of the DeepL translation API during the course of the study. These results show that the back-translation method can provide further insights into bias in language models.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 13 Oct 2026). Builds on 7 of its 30 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 Mar 2024.
Builds on
7 of 30 references.
References · 7
- 2019Mitigating Gender Bias in Natural Language Processing: Literature Reviewcited by 287
- 2019Identifying and Reducing Gender Bias in Word-Level Language Modelscited by 214
- 2018Style Transfer Through Back-Translationcited by 124
- 2021Stereotype and Skew: Quantifying Gender Bias in Pre-trained and Fine-tuned Language Modelscited by 57
- 2022Fewer Errors, but More Stereotypes? The Effect of Model Size on Gender Biascited by 33
- 2023She Elicits Requirements and He Tests: Software Engineering Gender Bias in Large Language Modelscited by 12
- 2023Good, but not always Fair: An Evaluation of Gender Bias for three commercial Machine Translation Systemscited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 1; 2026: 1.
4 papers.
- 2024Using Machine Learning to Distinguish Human-written from Machine-generated Creative Fictioncited by 4
- 2025Gender-Neutral Machine Translation Strategies in Practicecited by 3
- 2024WMT24 Test Suite: Gender Resolution in Speaker-Listener Dialogue Rolescited by 1
- 2026Detecting undisclosed LLM-generated content in parliamentary textscited by 0
- 2026Detecting undisclosed LLM-generated content in parliamentary texts12 Jun 2026
- 2025Gender-Neutral Machine Translation Strategies in Practice18 Jun 2025
- 2024Using Machine Learning to Distinguish Human-written from Machine-generated Creative Fiction15 Dec 2024
- 2024WMT24 Test Suite: Gender Resolution in Speaker-Listener Dialogue Roles9 Nov 2024