The DOI matches its Crossref record; 34 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
CrowS-Pairs: A Challenge Dataset for Measuring Social Biases in Masked Language Models
Open accessAbstract
Warning: This paper contains explicit statements of offensive stereotypes and may be upsetting.Pretrained language models, especially masked language models (MLMs) have seen success across many NLP tasks.However, there is ample evidence that they use the cultural biases that are undoubtedly present in the corpora they are trained on, implicitly creating harm with biased representations.To measure some forms of social bias in language models against protected demographic groups in the US, we introduce the Crowdsourced Stereotype Pairs benchmark (CrowS-Pairs).CrowS-Pairs has 1508 examples that cover stereotypes dealing with nine types of bias, like race, religion, and age.In CrowS-Pairs a model is presented with two sentences: one that is more stereotyping and another that is less stereotyping.The data focuses on stereotypes about historically disadvantaged groups and contrasts them with advantaged groups.We find that all three of the widelyused MLMs we evaluate substantially favor sentences that express stereotypes in every category in CrowS-Pairs.As work on building less biased models advances, this dataset can be used as a benchmark to evaluate progress.
Overview
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
Verification
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“In the literature, many works refer to the metric as the dataset, and use these interchangeably.”
From Bias and Fairness in Large Language Models: A Survey (2024) · cites this paper as Nangia et al. 2020
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Each pair consists of one sentence demonstrating a stereotype, and the other sentence replacing the disadvantaged group with an advantaged one (”
From Bias and Fairness in Large Language Models: A Survey (2024) · cites this paper as Nangia et al. 2020
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“InstructGPT does not significantly improve over GPT-3 on the Winogender (Rudinger et al., 2018) and CrowSPairs (Nangia et al., 2020) datasets.”
From Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback (2022) · cites this paper as Nangia et al., 2020
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“InstructGPT does not significantly improve over GPT-3 on the Winogender (Rudinger et al., 2018) and CrowSPairs (Nangia et al., 2020) datasets.”
From Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback (2022) · cites this paper as Nangia et al., 2020
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“One example is the CrowS-Pairs (Nangia et al. 2020) dataset consisting of stereotype sentence pairs proposed alongside a pseudo-log-likelihood metric over this specific set of sentence pairs:”
From Bias and Fairness in Large Language Models: A Survey (2024) · cites this paper as Nangia et al. 2020
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“The dataset covers nine types of biases: race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, age, nationality, disability, physical appearance, and socioeconomic status.”
From Bias and Fairness in Large Language Models: A Survey (2024) · cites this paper as Nangia et al. 2020
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Crowdsourced Stereotype Pairs (CrowS-Pairs) (Nangia et al. 2020) provides 1,508 sentence pairs to evaluate stereotypes of historically disadvantaged social groups.”
From Bias and Fairness in Large Language Models: A Survey (2024) · cites this paper as Nangia et al. 2020
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding
Devlin, J., Chang, M.-W., Lee, K., & Toutanova, K. (2019) · Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/n19-1423 · Cited by 54,325
Glove: Global Vectors for Word Representation
Pennington, J., Socher, R., & Manning, C. (2014) · Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.3115/v1/d14-1162 · Cited by 34,071
RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approach
Liu, Y., Ott, M., Goyal, N., Du, J., Joshi, M., Chen, D., Levy, O., Lewis, M., Zettlemoyer, L., & Stoyanov, V. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1907.11692 · Cited by 16,515
Deep Contextualized Word Representations
Peters, M., Neumann, M., Iyyer, M., Gardner, M., Clark, C., Lee, K., & Zettlemoyer, L. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/n18-1202 · Cited by 11,983
ALBERT: A Lite BERT for Self-supervised Learning of Language Representations
Lan, Z., Chen, M., Goodman, S., Gimpel, K., Sharma, P., & Soricut, R. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1909.11942 · Cited by 4,308
A Broad-Coverage Challenge Corpus for Sentence Understanding through Inference
Williams, A., Nangia, N., & Bowman, S. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/n18-1101 · Cited by 3,342
Self-citationSemantics derived automatically from language corpora contain human-like biases
Caliskan, A., Bryson, J. J., & Narayanan, A. (2017) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aal4230 · Cited by 2,887
Zhu, Y., Kiros, R., Zemel, R., Salakhutdinov, R., Urtasun, R., Torralba, A., & Fidler, S. (2015) · 2015 IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) · doi:10.1109/iccv.2015.11 · Cited by 2,264
Know What You Don’t Know: Unanswerable Questions for SQuAD
Rajpurkar, P., Jia, R., & Liang, P. (2018) · Proceedings of the 56th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 2: Short Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/p18-2124 · Cited by 2,240
Black sexual politics: African Americans, gender, and the new racism
(2005) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.42-3729 · Cited by 1,940
(2018) · International Conference on Learning Representations · Cited by 1,621
Self-citationMan is to Computer Programmer as Woman is to Homemaker? Debiasing Word Embeddings
Bolukbasi, T., Chang, K.-W., Zou, J., Saligrama, V., & Kalai, A. (2016) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1607.06520 · Cited by 1,615
Language (Technology) is Power: A Critical Survey of “Bias” in NLP
Blodgett, S. L., Barocas, S., Daumé III, H., & Wallach, H. (2020) · Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.485 · Cited by 1,050 · cited 1×
“Discussing Bias Upon surveying 146 NLP papers that analyze or mitigate bias, Blodgett et al. (2020) provide recommendations to guide such research.”
BackgroundRACE: Large-scale ReAding Comprehension Dataset From Examinations
Lai, G., Xie, Q., Liu, H., Yang, Y., & Hovy, E. (2017) · Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/d17-1082 · Cited by 1,044
Bender, E. M., & Friedman, B. (2018) · Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/tacl_a_00041 · Cited by 854
Gender bias in coreference resolution: Evaluation and debiasing methods
Zhao, J., Wang, T., Yatskar, M., Ordonez, V., & Chang, K.-W. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 2 (Short Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/n18-2003 · Cited by 684
StereoSet: Measuring stereotypical bias in pretrained language models
Nadeem, M., Bethke, A., & Reddy, S. (2021) · Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 11th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/2021.acl-long.416 · Cited by 643
A Corpus and Cloze Evaluation for Deeper Understanding of Commonsense Stories
Mostafazadeh, N., Chambers, N., He, X., Parikh, D., Batra, D., Vanderwende, L., Kohli, P., & Allen, J. (2016) · Proceedings of the 2016 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies · doi:10.18653/v1/n16-1098 · Cited by 598
WinoGrande: An Adversarial Winograd Schema Challenge at Scale
Sakaguchi, K., Le Bras, R., Bhagavatula, C., & Choi, Y. (2020) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1609/aaai.v34i05.6399 · Cited by 579
Salazar, J., Liang, D., Nguyen, T. Q., & Kirchhoff, K. (2020) · Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.240 · Cited by 510
On Measuring Social Biases in Sentence Encoders
May, C., Wang, A., Bordia, S., Bowman, S. R., & Rudinger, R. (2019) · Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/n19-1063 · Cited by 461
Self-citationGender Bias in Coreference Resolution
Rudinger, R., Naradowsky, J., Leonard, B., & Van Durme, B. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 2 (Short Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/n18-2002 · Cited by 443
Inherent Disagreements in Human Textual Inferences
Pavlick, E., & Kwiatkowski, T. (2019) · Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.1162/tacl_a_00293 · Cited by 214
Towards Debiasing Sentence Representations
Liang, P. P., Li, I., Zheng, E., Lim, Y. C., Salakhutdinov, R., & Morency, L. (2020) · Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.488 · Cited by 188
Gonen, H., & Goldberg, Y. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · Cited by 156
Social Bias in Elicited Natural Language Inferences
Rudinger, R., May, C., & Durme, B. V. (2017) · doi:10.18653/v1/w17-1609 · Cited by 98
Reducing Sentiment Bias in Language Models via Counterfactual EvaluationPreprint
Huang, P.-S., Zhang, H., Jiang, R., Stanforth, R., Welbl, J., Rae, J. W., Maini, V., Yogatama, D., & Kohli, P. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1911.03064 · Cited by 98
Fair Work: Crowd Work Minimum Wage with One Line of Code
Whiting, M. E., Hugh, G., & Bernstein, M. S. (2019) · Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Human Computation and Crowdsourcing · doi:10.1609/hcomp.v7i1.5283 · Cited by 80
Rozado, D. (2020) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0231189 · Cited by 61
Towards Understanding Gender Bias in Relation Extraction
Gaut, A., Sun, T., Tang, S., Huang, Y., Qian, J., ElSherief, M., Zhao, J., Mirza, D., Belding, E., Chang, K.-W., et al. (2020) · Proceedings of the conference - Association for Computational Linguistics. Meeting · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.265 · Cited by 26
Efficient Inference through Cascades of Weighted Tree Transducers
May, J., Knight, K. K., & Vogler, H. (2010) · Cited by 26
Crazy Patriotism and Angry (Post)Black Women
Madison, D. S. (2009) · Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies · doi:10.1080/14791420903063810 · Cited by 16
Race, Perceptions of Femininity, and the Power of the First Lady: A Comparative Analysis
Gillespie, A. (2016) · doi:10.4324/9781315661018-25 · Cited by 4
CVBed: Structuring CVs usingWord Embeddings
Garg, S., Singh, S. S., Mishra, A., & Dey, K. (2017) · International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing · Cited by 2
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- Emily Dinan, Angela Fan, Ledell Wu, Jason Weston, Douwe Kiela, and Adina Williams. 2020. Multi- dimensional gender bias classification. ArXiv.
- Paul Pu Liang, Irene Mengze Li, Emily Zheng, Yao Chong Lim, Ruslan Salakhutdinov, and Louis- Philippe Morency. 2020. Towards debiasing sen- tence representations. In Proceedings of the 2020 Association for Computational Linguistics. Associa- tion for Computational Linguistics.
- Alex Wang and Kyunghyun Cho. 2019. BERT has a mouth, and it must speak: BERT as a Markov random field language model. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Methods for Optimizing and Eval- uating Neural Language Generation, pages 30-36, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Association for Computa- tional Linguistics. · DOI
- Alex Wang, Yada Pruksachatkun, Nikita Nangia, Amanpreet Singh, Julian Michael, Felix Hill, Omer Levy, and Samuel Bowman. 2019. SuperGLUE: A stickier benchmark for general-purpose language un- derstanding systems. In H. Wallach, H. Larochelle, A. Beygelzimer, F. d Álché Buc, E. Fox, and R. Gar- nett, editors, Advances in Neural Information Pro- cessing Systems 32, pages 3266-3280.
- Kellie Webster, Marta Recasens, Vera Axelrod, and Ja- son Baldridge. 2018. Mind the GAP: A balanced corpus of gendered ambiguous pronouns. Transac- tions of the Association for Computational Linguis- tics, 6:605-617. · DOI · Paper page
- Thomas Wolf, Lysandre Debut, Victor Sanh, Julien Chaumond, Clement Delangue, Anthony Moi, Pier- ric Cistac, Tim Rault, Rémi Louf, Morgan Funtow- icz, and Jamie Brew. 2019. HuggingFace's trans- formers: State-of-the-art natural language process- ing. ArXiv.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models
Touvron, H., Lavril, T., Izacard, G., Martinet, X., Lachaux, M.-A., Lacroix, T., Rozière, B., Goyal, N., Hambro, E., Azhar, F., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2302.13971 · Cited by 4,602
Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback
Ouyang, L., Wu, J., Jiang, X., Almeida, D., Wainwright, C. L., Mishkin, P., Zhang, C., Agarwal, S., Slama, K., Ray, A., et al. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2203.02155 · Cited by 4,208
Large language models in medicine
Thirunavukarasu, A. J., Ting, D. S. J., Elangovan, K., Gutierrez, L., Tan, T. F., & Ting, D. S. W. (2023) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-023-02448-8 · Cited by 3,944
On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Models
Bommasani, R., Hudson, D. A., Adeli, E., Altman, R., Arora, S., von Arx, S., Bernstein, M. S., Bohg, J., Bosselut, A., Brunskill, E., et al. (2021) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2108.07258 · Cited by 2,676
A Survey of Large Language Models
Zhao, W. X., Zhou, K., Li, J., Tang, T., Dong, Z., Hou, Y., Zhang, B., Min, Y., Zhang, J., Liu, P., et al. (2026) · Frontiers of Computer Science · doi:10.1007/s11704-026-60308-3 · Cited by 2,093
“, CrowS-Pairs [371] and Winogender [372].”
Metadata
- Authors
- Nangia, N., Vania, C., Bhalerao, R., & Bowman, S. R.
- Affiliations
- New York University (US)
- ORCID
- Bhalerao, Rasika
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP)
- Published
- 2020
- Pages
- 1953-1967
- OpenAlex
- W3089430725
- Cited by
- 446
- References
- 35
- Citations by year
- 2026: 71 · 2025: 93 · 2024: 64 · 2023: 121 · 2022: 60 · 2021: 36 · 2020: 1
- FWCI
- 56.53
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- TIB Data Manager
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (1922658)
- Nvidia
- Samsung
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › 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
- social bias, masked language models, stereotypes, benchmark dataset, race, age, crowdsourced data
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
