REVIEW 2 cited by
Aligning (Medical) LLMs for (Counterfactual) Fairness
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
Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as promising solutions for a variety of medical and clinical decision support applications. However, LLMs are often subject to different types of biases, which can lead to unfair treatment of individuals, worsening health disparities, and reducing trust in AI-augmented medical tools. Aiming to address this important issue, in this study, we present a new model alignment approach for aligning LLMs using a preference optimization method within a knowledge distillation framework. Prior to presenting our proposed method, we first use an evaluation framework to conduct a comprehensive (largest to our knowledge) empirical evaluation to reveal the type and nature of existing biases in LLMs used for medical applications. We then offer a bias mitigation technique to reduce the unfair patterns in LLM outputs across different subgroups identified by the protected attributes. We show that our mitigation method is effective in significantly reducing observed biased patterns. Our code is publicly available at \url{https://github.com/healthylaife/FairAlignmentLLM}.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Lookahead Counterfactual Fairness
Lookahead counterfactual fairness requires that an individual's future status, not just the current decision, is equal in factual and counterfactual worlds; the paper gives a predictor that achieves this under linear ...
-
HyMaTE: A Hybrid Mamba and Transformer Model for EHR Representation Learning
A hybrid Mamba-Transformer architecture with attention pooling reports higher AUROC and AUPRC than several EHR baselines on five clinical prediction tasks, though gains are small relative to reported variance.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.