<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Natural Language Processing · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2204.09591/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2204.09591/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>A Survey on Bias and Fairness in Natural Language Processing — mentioned by geraltofrivia</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38148902</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2204.09591:38148902</guid><pubDate>Sun, 05 Nov 2023 06:43:08 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;That&amp;#x27;s not _completely_ true. There are a bunch of datasets (specific to some cultural/lingual contexts) like CrowsPairs[1], StereoSet[2]. There is a lot of work you can do to make sure that the model&amp;#x27;s predictions are fair as well [3]. But at the end, yes these datasets don&amp;#x27;t exist at the scale of training sets of these LLMs. Hence red-teaming and RLHF post convergence. PS: Yes I know CrowsPairs is a dataset with a bunch of flaws. My SO is working, in a team of 10+ linguists and researchers to develop a multi-lingual, generalized version of it which also addresses multiple problems with it.…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2204.09591/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.CL</category></item></channel></rss>
