REVIEW 5 cited by
Bias and Unfairness in Information Retrieval Systems: New Challenges in the LLM Era
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
read the original abstract
With the rapid advancements of large language models (LLMs), information retrieval (IR) systems, such as search engines and recommender systems, have undergone a significant paradigm shift. This evolution, while heralding new opportunities, introduces emerging challenges, particularly in terms of biases and unfairness, which may threaten the information ecosystem. In this paper, we present a comprehensive survey of existing works on emerging and pressing bias and unfairness issues in IR systems when the integration of LLMs. We first unify bias and unfairness issues as distribution mismatch problems, providing a groundwork for categorizing various mitigation strategies through distribution alignment. Subsequently, we systematically delve into the specific bias and unfairness issues arising from three critical stages of LLMs integration into IR systems: data collection, model development, and result evaluation. In doing so, we meticulously review and analyze recent literature, focusing on the definitions, characteristics, and corresponding mitigation strategies associated with these issues. Finally, we identify and highlight some open problems and challenges for future work, aiming to inspire researchers and stakeholders in the IR field and beyond to better understand and mitigate bias and unfairness issues of IR in this LLM era. We also consistently maintain a GitHub repository for the relevant papers and resources in this rising direction at https://github.com/KID-22/LLM-IR-Bias-Fairness-Survey.
Forward citations
Cited by 5 Pith papers
-
RbFT: Robust Fine-tuning for Retrieval-Augmented Generation against Retrieval Defects
Fine-tuning an LLM with defect detection and utility extraction tasks makes it more robust to noisy, irrelevant, and counterfactual documents in retrieval-augmented generation.
-
Writing Style Matters: An Examination of Bias and Fairness in Information Retrieval Systems
Text embedding models used in search are biased by writing style: informal and emotive documents rank lower, and most models match the query style when retrieving.
-
Unbiased Evaluation of Large Language Models from a Causal Perspective
The paper argues that perturbing benchmark questions with rule-based interventions gives a less contaminated, more interpretable evaluation of LLMs than static benchmarks or agent-generated questions.
-
What External Knowledge is Preferred by LLMs? Characterizing and Exploring Chain of Evidence in Imperfect Context for Multi-Hop QA
External knowledge satisfying intent, evidence nodes, and evidence relations is preferred by LLMs, improving multi-hop QA accuracy and robustness, and can be used to enhance RAG, poisoning, and defense systems.
-
Survey of different Large Language Model Architectures: Trends, Benchmarks, and Challenges
A broad but error-prone survey of LLM and MLLM architectures, training methods, benchmarks, and challenges.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.