-
Limited Ability of LLMs to Simulate Human Psychological Behaviours: a Psychometric Analysis
Authors:
Nikolay B Petrov,
Gregory Serapio-García,
Jason Rentfrow
Abstract:
The humanlike responses of large language models (LLMs) have prompted social scientists to investigate whether LLMs can be used to simulate human participants in experiments, opinion polls and surveys. Of central interest in this line of research has been map** out the psychological profiles of LLMs by prompting them to respond to standardized questionnaires. The conflicting findings of this res…
▽ More
The humanlike responses of large language models (LLMs) have prompted social scientists to investigate whether LLMs can be used to simulate human participants in experiments, opinion polls and surveys. Of central interest in this line of research has been map** out the psychological profiles of LLMs by prompting them to respond to standardized questionnaires. The conflicting findings of this research are unsurprising given that map** out underlying, or latent, traits from LLMs' text responses to questionnaires is no easy task. To address this, we use psychometrics, the science of psychological measurement. In this study, we prompt OpenAI's flagship models, GPT-3.5 and GPT-4, to assume different personas and respond to a range of standardized measures of personality constructs. We used two kinds of persona descriptions: either generic (four or five random person descriptions) or specific (mostly demographics of actual humans from a large-scale human dataset). We found that the responses from GPT-4, but not GPT-3.5, using generic persona descriptions show promising, albeit not perfect, psychometric properties, similar to human norms, but the data from both LLMs when using specific demographic profiles, show poor psychometrics properties. We conclude that, currently, when LLMs are asked to simulate silicon personas, their responses are poor signals of potentially underlying latent traits. Thus, our work casts doubt on LLMs' ability to simulate individual-level human behaviour across multiple-choice question answering tasks.
△ Less
Submitted 12 May, 2024;
originally announced May 2024.
-
GRASP: A Disagreement Analysis Framework to Assess Group Associations in Perspectives
Authors:
Vinodkumar Prabhakaran,
Christopher Homan,
Lora Aroyo,
Aida Mostafazadeh Davani,
Alicia Parrish,
Alex Taylor,
Mark Díaz,
Ding Wang,
Gregory Serapio-García
Abstract:
Human annotation plays a core role in machine learning -- annotations for supervised models, safety guardrails for generative models, and human feedback for reinforcement learning, to cite a few avenues. However, the fact that many of these human annotations are inherently subjective is often overlooked. Recent work has demonstrated that ignoring rater subjectivity (typically resulting in rater di…
▽ More
Human annotation plays a core role in machine learning -- annotations for supervised models, safety guardrails for generative models, and human feedback for reinforcement learning, to cite a few avenues. However, the fact that many of these human annotations are inherently subjective is often overlooked. Recent work has demonstrated that ignoring rater subjectivity (typically resulting in rater disagreement) is problematic within specific tasks and for specific subgroups. Generalizable methods to harness rater disagreement and thus understand the socio-cultural leanings of subjective tasks remain elusive. In this paper, we propose GRASP, a comprehensive disagreement analysis framework to measure group association in perspectives among different rater sub-groups, and demonstrate its utility in assessing the extent of systematic disagreements in two datasets: (1) safety annotations of human-chatbot conversations, and (2) offensiveness annotations of social media posts, both annotated by diverse rater pools across different socio-demographic axes. Our framework (based on disagreement metrics) reveals specific rater groups that have significantly different perspectives than others on certain tasks, and helps identify demographic axes that are crucial to consider in specific task contexts.
△ Less
Submitted 13 June, 2024; v1 submitted 8 November, 2023;
originally announced November 2023.
-
Moral Foundations of Large Language Models
Authors:
Marwa Abdulhai,
Gregory Serapio-Garcia,
Clément Crepy,
Daria Valter,
John Canny,
Natasha Jaques
Abstract:
Moral foundations theory (MFT) is a psychological assessment tool that decomposes human moral reasoning into five factors, including care/harm, liberty/oppression, and sanctity/degradation (Graham et al., 2009). People vary in the weight they place on these dimensions when making moral decisions, in part due to their cultural upbringing and political ideology. As large language models (LLMs) are t…
▽ More
Moral foundations theory (MFT) is a psychological assessment tool that decomposes human moral reasoning into five factors, including care/harm, liberty/oppression, and sanctity/degradation (Graham et al., 2009). People vary in the weight they place on these dimensions when making moral decisions, in part due to their cultural upbringing and political ideology. As large language models (LLMs) are trained on datasets collected from the internet, they may reflect the biases that are present in such corpora. This paper uses MFT as a lens to analyze whether popular LLMs have acquired a bias towards a particular set of moral values. We analyze known LLMs and find they exhibit particular moral foundations, and show how these relate to human moral foundations and political affiliations. We also measure the consistency of these biases, or whether they vary strongly depending on the context of how the model is prompted. Finally, we show that we can adversarially select prompts that encourage the moral to exhibit a particular set of moral foundations, and that this can affect the model's behavior on downstream tasks. These findings help illustrate the potential risks and unintended consequences of LLMs assuming a particular moral stance.
△ Less
Submitted 23 October, 2023;
originally announced October 2023.
-
Personality Traits in Large Language Models
Authors:
Greg Serapio-García,
Mustafa Safdari,
Clément Crepy,
Luning Sun,
Stephen Fitz,
Peter Romero,
Marwa Abdulhai,
Aleksandra Faust,
Maja Matarić
Abstract:
The advent of large language models (LLMs) has revolutionized natural language processing, enabling the generation of coherent and contextually relevant human-like text. As LLMs increasingly power conversational agents used by the general public world-wide, the synthetic personality embedded in these models, by virtue of training on large amounts of human data, is becoming increasingly important.…
▽ More
The advent of large language models (LLMs) has revolutionized natural language processing, enabling the generation of coherent and contextually relevant human-like text. As LLMs increasingly power conversational agents used by the general public world-wide, the synthetic personality embedded in these models, by virtue of training on large amounts of human data, is becoming increasingly important. Since personality is a key factor determining the effectiveness of communication, we present a comprehensive method for administering and validating personality tests on widely-used LLMs, as well as for sha** personality in the generated text of such LLMs. Applying this method, we found: 1) personality measurements in the outputs of some LLMs under specific prompting configurations are reliable and valid; 2) evidence of reliability and validity of synthetic LLM personality is stronger for larger and instruction fine-tuned models; and 3) personality in LLM outputs can be shaped along desired dimensions to mimic specific human personality profiles. We discuss application and ethical implications of the measurement and sha** method, in particular regarding responsible AI.
△ Less
Submitted 21 September, 2023; v1 submitted 30 June, 2023;
originally announced July 2023.
-
Intersectionality in Conversational AI Safety: How Bayesian Multilevel Models Help Understand Diverse Perceptions of Safety
Authors:
Christopher M. Homan,
Greg Serapio-Garcia,
Lora Aroyo,
Mark Diaz,
Alicia Parrish,
Vinodkumar Prabhakaran,
Alex S. Taylor,
Ding Wang
Abstract:
Conversational AI systems exhibit a level of human-like behavior that promises to have profound impacts on many aspects of daily life -- how people access information, create content, and seek social support. Yet these models have also shown a propensity for biases, offensive language, and conveying false information. Consequently, understanding and moderating safety risks in these models is a cri…
▽ More
Conversational AI systems exhibit a level of human-like behavior that promises to have profound impacts on many aspects of daily life -- how people access information, create content, and seek social support. Yet these models have also shown a propensity for biases, offensive language, and conveying false information. Consequently, understanding and moderating safety risks in these models is a critical technical and social challenge. Perception of safety is intrinsically subjective, where many factors -- often intersecting -- could determine why one person may consider a conversation with a chatbot safe and another person could consider the same conversation unsafe. In this work, we focus on demographic factors that could influence such diverse perceptions. To this end, we contribute an analysis using Bayesian multilevel modeling to explore the connection between rater demographics and how raters report safety of conversational AI systems. We study a sample of 252 human raters stratified by gender, age group, race/ethnicity group, and locale. This rater pool provided safety labels for 1,340 human-chatbot conversations. Our results show that intersectional effects involving demographic characteristics such as race/ethnicity, gender, and age, as well as content characteristics, such as degree of harm, all play significant roles in determining the safety of conversational AI systems. For example, race/ethnicity and gender show strong intersectional effects, particularly among South Asian and East Asian women. We also find that conversational degree of harm impacts raters of all race/ethnicity groups, but that Indigenous and South Asian raters are particularly sensitive to this harm. Finally, we observe the effect of education is uniquely intersectional for Indigenous raters, highlighting the utility of multilevel frameworks for uncovering underrepresented social perspectives.
△ Less
Submitted 20 June, 2023;
originally announced June 2023.
-
DICES Dataset: Diversity in Conversational AI Evaluation for Safety
Authors:
Lora Aroyo,
Alex S. Taylor,
Mark Diaz,
Christopher M. Homan,
Alicia Parrish,
Greg Serapio-Garcia,
Vinodkumar Prabhakaran,
Ding Wang
Abstract:
Machine learning approaches often require training and evaluation datasets with a clear separation between positive and negative examples. This risks simplifying and even obscuring the inherent subjectivity present in many tasks. Preserving such variance in content and diversity in datasets is often expensive and laborious. This is especially troubling when building safety datasets for conversatio…
▽ More
Machine learning approaches often require training and evaluation datasets with a clear separation between positive and negative examples. This risks simplifying and even obscuring the inherent subjectivity present in many tasks. Preserving such variance in content and diversity in datasets is often expensive and laborious. This is especially troubling when building safety datasets for conversational AI systems, as safety is both socially and culturally situated. To demonstrate this crucial aspect of conversational AI safety, and to facilitate in-depth model performance analyses, we introduce the DICES (Diversity In Conversational AI Evaluation for Safety) dataset that contains fine-grained demographic information about raters, high replication of ratings per item to ensure statistical power for analyses, and encodes rater votes as distributions across different demographics to allow for in-depth explorations of different aggregation strategies. In short, the DICES dataset enables the observation and measurement of variance, ambiguity, and diversity in the context of conversational AI safety. We also illustrate how the dataset offers a basis for establishing metrics to show how raters' ratings can intersects with demographic categories such as racial/ethnic groups, age groups, and genders. The goal of DICES is to be used as a shared resource and benchmark that respects diverse perspectives during safety evaluation of conversational AI systems.
△ Less
Submitted 19 June, 2023;
originally announced June 2023.
