Evaluating chatbot fairness is crucial given their rapid proliferation, yet typical chatbot tasks (e.g., resume writing, entertainment) diverge from the institutional decision-making tasks (e.g., resume screening) which have traditionally been central to discussion of algorithmic fairness. The open-ended nature and diverse use-cases of chatbots necessitate novel methods for bias assessment. This paper addresses these challenges by introducing a scalable counterfactual approach to evaluate "first-person fairness," meaning fairness toward chatbot users based on demographic characteristics. Our method employs a Language Model as a Research Assistant (LMRA) to yield quantitative measures of harmful stereotypes and qualitative analyses of demographic differences in chatbot responses. We apply this approach to assess biases in six of our language models across millions of interactions, covering sixty-six tasks in nine domains and spanning two genders and four races. Independent human annotations corroborate the LMRA-generated bias evaluations. This study represents the first large-scale fairness evaluation based on real-world chat data. We highlight that post-training reinforcement learning techniques significantly mitigate these biases. This evaluation provides a practical methodology for ongoing bias monitoring and mitigation.

We present a framework for automatically learning human user models from joint-action demonstrations that enables a robot to compute a robust policy for a collaborative task with a human. First, the demonstrated action sequences are clustered into different human types using an unsupervised learning algorithm. A reward function is then learned for each type through the employment of an inverse reinforcement learning algorithm. The learned model is then incorporated into a mixed-observability Markov decision process (MOMDP) formulation, wherein the human type is a partially observable variable. With this framework, we can infer online the human type of a new user that was not included in the training set, and can compute a policy for the robot that will be aligned to the preference of this user. In a human subject experiment (n=30), participants agreed more strongly that the robot anticipated their actions when working with a robot incorporating the proposed framework (p<0.01), compared to manually annotating robot actions. In trials where participants faced difficulty annotating the robot actions to complete the task, the proposed framework significantly improved team efficiency (p<0.01). The robot incorporating the framework was also found to be more responsive to human actions compared to policies computed using a hand-coded reward function by a domain expert (p<0.01). These results indicate that learning human user models from joint-action demonstrations and encoding them in a MOMDP formalism can support effective teaming in human-robot collaborative tasks.