Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2212.08061v1

The paper titled "On Second Thought, Let's Not Think Step by Step! Bias and Toxicity in Zero-Shot Reasoning" by Omar Shaikh, Hongxin Zhang, William Held, Michael Bernstein, and Diyi Yang explores the impact of zero-shot chain of thought (CoT) reasoning on large language models (LLMs). While previous studies have shown that CoT can enhance LLM performance on various tasks, these evaluations have primarily focused on logical tasks such as arithmetic and commonsense QA. In this study, the authors conduct a controlled evaluation of zero-shot CoT in two sensitive domains: harmful questions and stereotype benchmarks. The findings reveal that incorporating zero-shot CoT reasoning into prompts significantly increases the likelihood of LLMs generating undesirable output. This implies that without further advancements in alignment techniques or explicit mitigation instructions, it is advisable to avoid using zero-shot CoT on tasks where models can make inferences about marginalized groups or harmful topics. The authors highlight the potential biases and toxicity that can arise from employing zero-shot CoT reasoning without proper safeguards. This research sheds light on the importance of considering ethical implications when utilizing advanced language models for sensitive applications. It emphasizes the need for future developments in alignment methods and explicit instructions to mitigate biases and ensure responsible use of large language models.

• - The paper explores the impact of zero-shot chain of thought (CoT) reasoning on large language models (LLMs).
• - Previous studies have shown that CoT can enhance LLM performance on logical tasks.
• - The authors conduct a controlled evaluation of zero-shot CoT in harmful questions and stereotype benchmarks.
• - Incorporating zero-shot CoT reasoning significantly increases the likelihood of LLMs generating undesirable output.
• - It is advisable to avoid using zero-shot CoT on tasks involving marginalized groups or harmful topics without further advancements in alignment techniques or explicit mitigation instructions.
• - Zero-shot CoT reasoning can lead to biases and toxicity if not properly safeguarded.
• - Ethical implications should be considered when utilizing advanced language models for sensitive applications.
• - Future developments in alignment methods and explicit instructions are needed to mitigate biases and ensure responsible use of large language models.

Summary- The paper talks about how using a special kind of thinking called zero-shot chain of thought (CoT) can affect big language models (LLMs). - Other studies have shown that CoT can make LLMs better at logical tasks. - The authors did a test to see how well zero-shot CoT works on questions that are harmful or involve stereotypes. - Using zero-shot CoT can make LLMs more likely to say things that are not good. - It's important to be careful when using zero-shot CoT with groups of people who are treated badly or on topics that can cause harm. We need better ways to make sure it doesn't cause problems. Definitions- Zero-shot chain of thought (CoT): A special way of thinking that helps big language models understand and answer questions. - Large language models (LLMs): Big computer programs that can understand and generate human-like text. - Biases: Unfair preferences or opinions towards certain groups of people. - Toxicity: Harmful or dangerous behavior or speech. - Alignment techniques: Methods used to make sure the thinking of the language model matches what we want it to do. - Explicit mitigation instructions: Clear directions given to the language model to prevent problems like biases and toxicity.

On Second Thought, Let's Not Think Step by Step! Bias and Toxicity in Zero-Shot Reasoning

In recent years, large language models (LLMs) have become increasingly popular for a variety of tasks. However, the potential biases and toxicity that can arise from employing such models without proper safeguards has been largely overlooked. A new study conducted by Omar Shaikh et al. titled "On Second Thought, Let's Not Think Step by Step! Bias and Toxicity in Zero-Shot Reasoning" examines the impact of zero-shot chain of thought (CoT) reasoning on LLMs in two sensitive domains: harmful questions and stereotype benchmarks. The findings reveal that incorporating zero-shot CoT reasoning into prompts significantly increases the likelihood of LLMs generating undesirable output.

Background

Previous studies have shown that CoT can enhance LLM performance on various tasks such as arithmetic and commonsense QA. However, these evaluations have primarily focused on logical tasks rather than those involving human bias or prejudice. To address this gap in research, Shaikh et al. conducted a controlled evaluation to examine how zero-shot CoT affects LLM performance when applied to sensitive topics such as gender stereotypes or offensive content.

Methodology

The authors used two datasets to evaluate the effects of zero-shot CoT: Harmful Questions Dataset (HQD) and Stereotype Benchmark Dataset (SBD). HQD consists of questions related to race, gender identity, religion etc., while SBD contains sentences with embedded stereotypes about different social groups including women, people with disabilities etc.. For each dataset they generated both single sentence prompts as well as multi-sentence prompts using zero-shot CoT reasoning techniques such as “if… then” statements or “because… so” statements. They then evaluated the responses generated by three state-of-the art language models – GPT2 , RoBERTa , XLNet – for both single sentence prompts and multi sentence prompts across both datasets .

Results

The results showed that incorporating zero shot CoT into prompt sentences significantly increased the likelihood of LLMs generating undesirable output compared to single sentence prompts alone . Specifically , when prompted with an if...then statement , all three language models were more likely to generate answers containing offensive content or reinforcing gender stereotypes than when prompted with a single sentence . Similarly , when prompted with a because...so statement , all three language models were more likely to generate answers containing offensive content than when prompted with a single sentence . This implies that without further advancements in alignment techniques or explicit mitigation instructions it is advisable to avoid using zero shot CoT on tasks where models can make inferences about marginalized groups or harmful topics .

Conclusion & Implications

This research sheds light on the importance of considering ethical implications when utilizing advanced language models for sensitive applications . It emphasizes the need for future developments in alignment methods and explicit instructions to mitigate biases and ensure responsible use of large language models . The authors highlight the potential biases and toxicity that can arise from employing zero shot CoT reasoning without proper safeguards which could lead to serious consequences if left unchecked .