REVIEW 3 cited by
DICES Dataset: Diversity in Conversational AI Evaluation for Safety
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
read the original 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 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.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
Pluralis v0.1: Towards a Multicultural, Multimodal, Multilingual Benchmark for AI Risk and Reliability
Pluralis v0.1 is a culture-first, multimodal, multilingual VLM safety benchmark spanning 6 APAC locales with 6,448 prompts and an agreement-gated LLM judge that disentangles safety from cultural appropriateness.
-
Will Annotators Disagree? Identifying Subjectivity in Value-Laden Arguments
Directly predicting whether annotators will disagree on a value label outperforms inferring disagreement from per-annotator value predictions on the Touché23-ValueEval dataset.
-
Beyond the Binary: Capturing Diverse Preferences With Reward Regularization
Reward models trained with a margin derived from synthetic LLM judgments better match aggregate human preferences than standard binary-trained reward models, mainly on subjective prompts.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.