REVIEW 1 cited by
Uncovering and Quantifying Social Biases in Code Generation
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 popularity of automatic code generation tools, such as Copilot, the study of the potential hazards of these tools is gaining importance. In this work, we explore the social bias problem in pre-trained code generation models. We propose a new paradigm to construct code prompts and successfully uncover social biases in code generation models. To quantify the severity of social biases in generated code, we develop a dataset along with three metrics to evaluate the overall social bias and fine-grained unfairness across different demographics. Experimental results on three pre-trained code generation models (Codex, InCoder, and CodeGen) with varying sizes, reveal severe social biases. Moreover, we conduct analysis to provide useful insights for further choice of code generation models with low social bias. (This work contains examples that potentially implicate stereotypes, associations, and other harms that could be offensive to individuals in certain social groups.)
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
LangChoiceBench: Measuring and Explaining Programming-Language Choice in LLMs
LLMs implement 35.3% of benchmark projects in Python despite recommending it only 10.7% of the time, mostly because the choice is automatic rather than deliberate.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.