BiasAsker: Measuring the Bias in Conversational AI System
Open accessAbstract
Powered by advanced Artificial Intelligence (AI) techniques, conversational AI systems, such as ChatGPT, and digital assistants like Siri, have been widely deployed in daily life. However, such systems may still produce content containing biases and stereotypes, causing potential social problems. Due to modern AI techniques’ data-driven, black-box nature, comprehensively identifying and measuring biases in conversational systems remains challenging. Particularly, it is hard to generate inputs that can comprehensively trigger potential bias due to the lack of data containing both social groups and biased properties. In addition, modern conversational systems can produce diverse responses (e.g., chatting and explanation), which makes existing bias detection methods based solely on sentiment and toxicity hardly being adopted. In this paper, we propose BiasAsker, an automated framework to identify and measure social bias in conversational AI systems. To obtain social groups and biased properties, we construct a comprehensive social bias dataset containing a total of 841 groups and 5,021 biased properties. Given the dataset, BiasAsker automatically generates questions and adopts a novel method based on existence measurement to identify two types of biases (i.e., absolute bias and related bias) in conversational systems. Extensive experiments on eight commercial systems and two famous research models, such as ChatGPT and GPT-3, show that 32.83% of the questions generated by BiasAsker can trigger biased behaviors in these widely deployed conversational systems. All the code, data, and experimental results have been released to facilitate future research.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
AI Ethics involves ensuring traceability, auditability, and transparency throughout model development lifecycle, employing practices such as algorithmic auditing, ethics boards, and documentation standards and model cards.
“Furthermore, AI Ethics involves ensuring traceability, auditability, and transparency throughout the model development lifecycle, employing practices such as algorithmic auditing, establishing ethics boards, and adhering to documentation standards and model cards [237], [236].”
From From Google Gemini to OpenAI Q* (Q-Star): A Survey on Reshaping the Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) Research Landscape (2025) · cites this paper as [236]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 20 · Cited by 54
Research works printed but not linked: 29
- 2021. Coverage-Guided Testing for Recurrent Neural Networks. IEEE Transactions on Reliability (2021).
- Ashutosh Baheti, Maarten Sap, Alan Ritter, and Mark O. Riedl. 2021. Just Say No: Analyzing the Stance of Neural Dialogue Generation in Offensive Contexts. In Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing.
- Shikha Bordia and Samuel R. Bowman. 2019. Identifying and Reducing Gen- der Bias in Word-Level Language Models. In North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
- Tom B. Brown, Benjamin Mann, Nick Ryder, Melanie Subbiah, Jared Kaplan, Pra- fulla Dhariwal, Arvind Neelakantan, Pranav Shyam, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, Sandhini Agarwal, Ariel Herbert-Voss, Gretchen Krueger, T. J. Henighan, Rewon Child, Aditya Ramesh, Daniel M. Ziegler, Jeff Wu, Clemens Winter, Christopher Hesse, Mark Chen, Eric Sigler, Mateusz Litwin, Scott Gray, Benjamin Chess, Jack Clark, Christopher Berner, Sam McCandlish, Alec Radford, Ilya Sutskever, and Dario Amodei. 2020. Language Models are Few-Shot Learners. NeurIPS (2020).
- Nicholas Carlini, Pratyush Mishra, Tavish Vaidya, Yuankai Zhang, Michael E. Sherr, Clay Shields, David A. Wagner, and Wenchao Zhou. 2016. Hidden Voice Commands. In USENIX Security Symposium.
- Christopher Clark, Kenton Lee, Ming-Wei Chang, Tom Kwiatkowski, Michael Collins, and Kristina Toutanova. 2019. BoolQ: Exploring the Surprising Difficulty of Natural Yes/No Questions. In North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
- Emily Dinan, Angela Fan, Adina Williams, Jack Urbanek, Douwe Kiela, and Jason Weston. 2019. Queens Are Powerful Too: Mitigating Gender Bias in Dialogue Generation. In Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing.
- Shashij Gupta. 2020. Machine Translation Testing via Pathological Invariance. 2020 IEEE/ACM 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion Proceedings (ICSE-Companion) (2020), 107-109.
- Wenxiang Jiao, Zhaopeng Tu, Jiarui Li, Wenxuan Wang, Jen tse Huang, and Shuming Shi. 2022. Tencent's Multilingual Machine Translation System for WMT22 Large-Scale African Languages. In Conference on Machine Translation.
- Wenxiang Jiao, Wenxuan Wang, Jen tse Huang, Xing Wang, and Zhaopeng Tu. 2023. Is ChatGPT A Good Translator? A Preliminary Study. ArXiv abs/2301.08745 (2023). · arXiv
- Chin-Yew Lin. 2004. ROUGE: A Package for Automatic Evaluation of Summaries. In Text Summarization Branches Out. Association for Computational Linguistics, Barcelona, Spain, 74-81. https://aclanthology.org/W04-1013
- Haochen Liu, Jamell Dacon, Wenqi Fan, Hui Liu, Zitao Liu, and Jiliang Tang. 2020. Does Gender Matter? Towards Fairness in Dialogue Systems. In International Conference on Computational Linguistics.
- Haochen Liu, Wentao Wang, Yiqi Wang, Hui Liu, Zitao Liu, and Jiliang Tang. 2020. Mitigating Gender Bias for Neural Dialogue Generation with Adversarial Learning. In Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing.
- Yuanfu Luo, Malika Meghjani, Qi Heng Ho, David Hsu, and Daniela Rus. 2021. Interactive Planning for Autonomous Urban Driving in Adversarial Scenarios. 2021 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) (2021), 5261-5267.
- Aleksander Madry, Aleksandar Makelov, Ludwig Schmidt, Dimitris Tsipras, and Adrian Vladu. 2017. Towards Deep Learning Models Resistant to Adversarial Attacks. ICLR (2017).
- Kishore Papineni, Salim Roukos, Todd Ward, and Wei-Jing Zhu. 2002. Bleu: a Method for Automatic Evaluation of Machine Translation. In Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
- Kexin Pei, Yinzhi Cao, Junfeng Yang, and Suman Sekhar Jana. 2017. DeepXplore: Automated Whitebox Testing of Deep Learning Systems. Proceedings of the 26th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (2017).
- Hung Viet Pham, Mijung Kim, Lin Tan, Yaoliang Yu, and Nachiappan Nagappan. 2021. DEVIATE: A Deep Learning Variance Testing Framework. 2021 36th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE) (2021), 1286-1290.
- Stephen Roller, Emily Dinan, Naman Goyal, Da Ju, Mary Williamson, Yinhan Liu, Jing Xu, Myle Ott, Kurt Shuster, Eric Michael Smith, Y-Lan Boureau, and Jason Weston. 2020. Recipes for building an open-domain chatbot. CoRR abs/2004.13637 (2020). arXiv:2004.13637 https://arxiv.org/abs/2004.13637 · arXiv
- Md. Rashad Al Hasan Rony, Liubov Kovriguina, Debanjan Chaudhuri, Ricardo Usbeck, and Jens Lehmann. 2022. RoMe: A Robust Metric for Evaluating Natural Language Generation. In Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
- Maarten Sap, Saadia Gabriel, Lianhui Qin, Dan Jurafsky, Noah A. Smith, and Yejin Choi. 2020. Social Bias Frames: Reasoning about Social and Power Implications of Language. ACL (2020).
- Emily Sheng, Kai-Wei Chang, P. Natarajan, and Nanyun Peng. 2021. "Nice Try, Kiddo": Investigating Ad Hominems in Dialogue Responses. In NAACL.
- Sakshi Udeshi, Pryanshu Arora, and Sudipta Chattopadhyay. 2018. Automated Directed Fairness Testing. 2018 33rd IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE) (2018), 98-108.
- Jack Urbanek, Angela Fan, Siddharth Karamcheti, Saachi Jain, Samuel Humeau, Emily Dinan, Tim Rocktäschel, Douwe Kiela, Arthur D. Szlam, and Jason Weston. 2019. Learning to Speak and Act in a Fantasy Text Adventure Game. EMNLP abs/1903.03094 (2019). · arXiv
- Jingyi Wang, Jialuo Chen, Youcheng Sun, Xingjun Ma, Dongxia Wang, Jun Sun, and Peng Cheng. 2021. RobOT: Robustness-Oriented Testing for Deep Learning Systems. 2021 IEEE/ACM 43rd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE) (2021), 300-311.
- Longyue Wang, Jinhua Du, Liangyou Li, Zhaopeng Tu, Andy Way, and Qun Liu. 2017. Semantics-Enhanced Task-Oriented Dialogue Translation: A Case Study on Hotel Booking. In International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing.
- Jing Xu, Da Ju, Margaret Li, Y-Lan Boureau, Jason Weston, and Emily Dinan. 2021. Bot-Adversarial Dialogue for Safe Conversational Agents. In North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
- Zhao Yan, Nan Duan, Peng Chen, M. Zhou, Jianshe Zhou, and Zhoujun Li. 2017. Building Task-Oriented Dialogue Systems for Online Shopping. In AAAI Confer- ence on Artificial Intelligence.
- Yizhe Zhang, Siqi Sun, Michel Galley, Yen-Chun Chen, Chris Brockett, Xiang Gao, Jianfeng Gao, Jingjing Liu, and William B. Dolan. 2019. DIALOGPT : Large-Scale Generative Pre-training for Conversational Response Generation. In Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
- Authors
- Wan, Y., Wang, W., He, P., Gu, J., Bai, H., & Lyu, M. R.
- Affiliations
- Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
- Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shenzhen (CN)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 31st ACM Joint European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2023-11-30
- Pages
- 515-527
- OpenAlex
- W4389209181
- Cited by
- 54
- References
- 20
- Citations by year
- 2026: 13 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 4
- FWCI
- 13.53
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- ACM Joint European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/FSE) (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- Research Grants Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China (CUHK 14206921)
- National Natural Science Foundation of China (62102340)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Keywords
- bias measurement, conversational AI, social bias, stereotypes, bias detection, question generation, absolute bias, ChatGPT, GPT-3, large language models, virtual assistants
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review