This work develops a policy gradient technique involving a group-level reward function that operates on matched pairs of counterfactual prompts that reduces counterfactual differences while preserving overall response quality and proves that the models continue to adapt appropriately when such sensitive information is relevant.
Abstract
Small variations in prompt characteristics can meaningfully alter the semantics, tone, and contextual assumptions of large language model outputs. Such characteristics can involve group variables such as demographics or other sensitive latent attributes. Sensitivity to such input variables is undesirable when demographic information is causally irrelevant to the task, but might still be relevant for generation of semantically coherent responses. This makes the task of enforcing counterfactual invariance while preserving model utility difficult. To study this problem, we first show that standard model alignment recipes (such as reinforcement learning) increase differences in response quality across demographics, while improving overall response quality, ultimately amplifying what is known as counterfactual bias. To address this, we develop a policy gradient technique involving a group-level reward function that operates on matched pairs of counterfactual prompts. For completeness, we build a dataset of controlled counterfactual prompt pairs and design an evaluation that separately measures cases where demographic information is causally relevant to the answer. Finally, we validate our findings on several fairness benchmarks. We demonstrate that our methods reduce counterfactual differences while preserving overall response quality and that the models continue to adapt appropriately when such sensitive information is relevant.
Current approaches to aligning language models often make it hard to know what behavior is being rewarded or to change that reward in a targeted way. In particular, standard preference-based methods collapse multiple considerations into aggregate human judgments, obscuring what drives the resulting reward, while princi...
Johann D. Gaebler, C. Isley, Max Lamparth et al.· 0 citations
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to generate, complete, and transform information in settings where their outputs can shape consequential decisions, raising concerns about their impact on demographic disparities. In this context, causal inference provides a principled basis for assessing fairness, bec...
Patrik Okanovic, T. Hoefler, Drago Plečko· 0 citations
This work proposes counterfactual (CF) marginalisation as a test-time evaluation procedure for assessing robustness of classification models to such variables and demonstrates this framework's utility for quantitative robustness evaluation.
Yasin Ibrahim, Hermione Warr, R. Evans et al.· 0 citations
Comparing three model families and multiple math benchmarks, COMPASS outperforms the activation-steering baselines the authors compare against, improves GSM8K accuracy by 16 percentage points on average, and approaches CoT accuracy with 20-70\% fewer generated tokens.
Pratyay Dutta, Kowshik Thopalli, V. Narayanaswamy· 0 citations
Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) has improved the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs), yet their predictions remain sensitive to task-irrelevant prompt features. We investigate this sensitivity through semifactual prompt interventions that preserve the underlying problem and its...
Jun-Shu Pan, Zhi-Zhang Fu, Shu-Lin Huang et al.· 0 citations
Policy Aligned Critic Training (PACT), which adopts an Actor-then-Critic update order to apply importance sampling correction to critic training and better align the critic with the updated policy, is developed.
Jia-Yan Fu, Hang Xu, Yong Zhang et al.· 0 citations