Search for: All records

Fairness and robustness are two important notions of learning models. Fairness ensures that models do not disproportionately harm (or benefit) some groups over others, while robustness measures the models' resilience against small input perturbations. While equally important properties, this paper illustrates a dichotomy between fairness and robustness, and analyzes when striving for fairness decreases the model robustness to adversarial samples. The reported analysis sheds light on the factors causing such contrasting behavior, suggesting that distance to the decision boundary across groups as a key factor. Experiments on non-linear models and different architectures validate the theoretical findings. In addition to the theoretical analysis, the paper also proposes a simple, yet effective, solution to construct models achieving good tradeoffs between fairness and robustness. 

Low-rank approximation techniques have become the de facto standard for fine-tuning Large Language Models (LLMs) due to their reduced computational and memory requirements. This paper investigates the effectiveness of these methods in capturing the shift of fine-tuning datasets from the initial pre-trained data distribution. Our findings reveal that there are cases in which low-rank fine-tuning falls short in learning such shifts. This, in turn, produces non-negligible side effects, especially when fine-tuning is adopted for toxicity mitigation in pre-trained models, or in scenarios where it is important to provide fair models. Through comprehensive empirical evidence on several models, datasets, and tasks, we show that low-rank fine-tuning inadvertently preserves undesirable biases and toxic behaviors. We also show that this extends to sequential decision-making tasks, emphasizing the need for careful evaluation to promote responsible LLMs development. 

The Private Aggregation of Teacher Ensembles (PATE) is a machine learning framework that enables the creation of private models through the combination of multiple teacher models and a student model. The student model learns to predict an output based on the voting of the teachers, and the resulting model satisfies differential privacy. PATE has been shown to be effective in creating private models in semi-supervised settings or when protecting data labels is a priority.This paper explores whether the use of PATE can result in unfairness, and demonstrates that it can lead to accuracy disparities among groups of individuals. The paper also analyzes the algorithmic and data properties that contribute to these disproportionate impacts, why these aspects are affecting different groups disproportionately, and offers recommendations for mitigating these effects.