EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Amelia Fiske
dblp:308/0041
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Trustworthy machine learning · 67% Language models and text generation · 33% | |
| Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper |
Medical and health informatics · 100% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › fairness
demographic bias |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Cross-Care: Assessing the Healthcare Implications of Pre-training Data on Language Model Bias · NeurIPS 2024 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
fairness |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Cross-Care: Assessing the Healthcare Implications of Pre-training Data on Language Model Bias · NeurIPS 2024 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
large language model |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Cross-Care: Assessing the Healthcare Implications of Pre-training Data on Language Model Bias · NeurIPS 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
benchmark framework · 1.5alignment method · 1.5
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Cross-Care: Assessing the Healthcare Implications of Pre-training Data on Language Model BiasabstractLarge language models (LLMs) are increasingly essential in processing natural languages, yet their application is frequently compromised by biases and inaccuracies originating in their training data.In this study, we introduce \textbf{Cross-Care}, the first benchmark framework dedicated to assessing biases and real world knowledge in LLMs, specifically focusing on the representation of disease prevalence across diverse demographic groups.We systematically evaluate how demographic biases embedded in pre-training corpora like $ThePile$ influence the outputs of LLMs.We expose and quantify discrepancies by juxtaposing these biases against actual disease prevalences in various U.S. demographic groups.Our results highlight substantial misalignment between LLM representation of disease prevalence and real disease prevalence rates across demographic subgroups, indicating a pronounced risk of bias propagation and a lack of real-world grounding for medical applications of LLMs.Furthermore, we observe that various alignment methods minimally resolve inconsistencies in the models' representation of disease prevalence across different languages.For further exploration and analysis, we make all data and a data visualization tool available at: \url{www.crosscare.net}. Shan Chen 0004, Jack Gallifant, Mingye Gao, Nikolaj Munch, Ajay Muthukkumar, Arvind Rajan, Jaya Kolluri, Amelia Fiske, Janna Hastings, Hugo J. W. L. Aerts, Brian Anthony 0001, Leo A. Celi, William G. La Cava, Danielle S. Bitterman |
NeurIPS | 9 |