目录

【Datawhale 大模型基础】第三章 大型语言模型的有害性(危害)

第三章 大型语言模型的有害性(危害)

As illustrated aforementioned, LLMs have unique abilities that present only when the model have huge parameters. However, there are also some harms in LLMs.

When considering any technology, we must carefully weigh its benefits and harms. This is a complex task for three reasons:

  1. Benefits and harms are difficult to quantify;
  2. Even if they could be quantified, the distribution of these benefits and harms among the population is not uniform (marginalized groups often bear more harm), making the balancing act between them a thorny ethical issue;
  3. Even if you can make meaningful trade-offs, what authority do decision-makers have to make decisions?

Preventing of LLMs' harmfulness is still a very new research direction. The current content focuses mainly on the following two points:

  1. Harm related to performance differences: For specific tasks (such as question answering), performance differences mean that the model performs better in some groups and worse in others.
  2. Harm related to social biases and stereotypes: Social bias is the systematic association of a concept (such as science) with certain groups (such as men) over others (such as women). Stereotypes are a specific and widely held form of social bias in which the associations are widely held, oversimplified, and generally fixed.

Due to the opacity of pre-training datasets for LLMs and their inclusion of web-crawled data, it is likely that they contain online discussions encompassing political topics (e.g., climate change, abortion, gun control), hate speech, discrimination, and other forms of media bias. Some researchers have identified misogyny, pornography, and other harmful stereotypes within these pre-training datasets. Similarly, researchers **have observed that LLMs exhibit political biases that exacerbate the existing polarization in the pre-training corpora, thereby perpetuating societal biases in the prediction of hate speech and the detection of misinformation.

Recent studies have delved into the potential sources of biases in LLMs (such as training data or model specifications), the ethical concerns associated with deploying biased LLMs in diverse applications, and the current methods for mitigating these biases. An interesting find is that all models exhibit systematic preferences for stereotype data, showing that there is an eager need to establish a high-quality pre-training database.

Toxicity and disinformation are two key harms that all the researchers concern. In the context of toxicity and disinformation, LLMs can be served as two purposes:

  1. They can be used to generate toxic content, which malicious actors can exploit to amplify their information dissemination;
  2. They can be used to detect disinformation, thereby aiding in content moderation.

The challenge of identifying toxicity lies in the ambiguity of labeling, where the output may be toxic in one context but not in others, and different individuals may have varying perceptions of toxicity. Jigsaw, a division of Google, focuses on using technology to address societal issues, such as extremism. In 2017, they developed a widely popular proprietary service called Perspective, which is a machine learning model that assigns a toxicity score between 0 and 1 to each input. This model was trained on discussion pages on Wikipedia (where volunteer moderators discuss editing decisions) and labeled by crowdworkers. And the website is: https://perspectiveapi.com/.

For disinformation, it is the deliberate presentation of false or misleading information to deceive a specific audience, often with an adversarial intent. Another similar noun is misinformation (can be considered as "hallucinations"), which refers to information that is misleadingly presented as true. It is important to note that misleading and false information is not always verifiable; at times, it may raise doubts or shift the burden of proof onto the audience.

A recent research hotspot is hallucinations. To differentiate between various types of hallucinations, the given source content of the model can be analyzed, such as the prompt, potentially containing examples or retrieved context. There are two types of hallucinations: intrinsic and extrinsic hallucinations. In the former, the generated text logically contradicts the source content. In the latter, users are unable to verify the accuracy of the output based on the provided source; the source content lacks sufficient information to evaluate the output, making it undetermined. Extrinsic hallucination is not necessarily erroneous, as it simply means the model produced an output that cannot be supported or refuted by the source content. However, this is still somewhat undesirable as the provided information cannot be verified.

To better compare the difference between them, I cite a figure from a survey:

p.s. Recently I find some insteresting paper that discuss abilities about LLMs, maybe I will make notes in Chinese after finishing datawhale study.

END

本文是转载文章,点击查看原文
如有侵权,请联系 xyy@jishuzhan.net 删除
相关推荐
阿坡RPA4 小时前
手搓MCP客户端&服务端:从零到实战极速了解MCP是什么?
人工智能·aigc
用户27784491049935 小时前
借助DeepSeek智能生成测试用例:从提示词到Excel表格的全流程实践
人工智能·python
机器之心5 小时前
刚刚,DeepSeek公布推理时Scaling新论文,R2要来了?
人工智能
算AI7 小时前
人工智能+牙科:临床应用中的几个问题
人工智能·算法
凯子坚持 c8 小时前
基于飞桨框架3.0本地DeepSeek-R1蒸馏版部署实战
人工智能·paddlepaddle
你觉得2058 小时前
哈尔滨工业大学DeepSeek公开课:探索大模型原理、技术与应用从GPT到DeepSeek|附视频与讲义下载方法
大数据·人工智能·python·gpt·学习·机器学习·aigc
8K超高清8 小时前
中国8K摄像机:科技赋能文化传承新图景
大数据·人工智能·科技·物联网·智能硬件
hyshhhh9 小时前
【算法岗面试题】深度学习中如何防止过拟合?
网络·人工智能·深度学习·神经网络·算法·计算机视觉
薛定谔的猫-菜鸟程序员9 小时前
零基础玩转深度神经网络大模型:从Hello World到AI炼金术-详解版(含:Conda 全面使用指南)
人工智能·神经网络·dnn
币之互联万物9 小时前
2025 AI智能数字农业研讨会在苏州启幕,科技助农与数据兴业成焦点
人工智能·科技