Arrow Research search

Author name cluster

Hannah Rose Kirk

Possible papers associated with this exact author name in Arrow. This page groups case-insensitive exact name matches and is not a full identity disambiguation profile.

4 papers
1 author row

Possible papers

4

NeurIPS Conference 2025 Conference Paper

Measuring what Matters: Construct Validity in Large Language Model Benchmarks

  • Andrew M. Bean
  • Ryan Othniel Kearns
  • Angelika Romanou
  • Franziska Sofia Hafner
  • Harry Mayne
  • Jan Batzner
  • Negar Foroutan Eghlidi
  • Chris Schmitz

Evaluating large language models (LLMs) is crucial for both assessing their capabilities and identifying safety or robustness issues prior to deployment. Reliably measuring abstract and complex phenomena such as safety' and robustness' requires strong construct validity, that is, having measures that represent what matters to the phenomenon. With a team of 29 expert reviewers, we conduct a systematic review of 445 LLM benchmarks from leading conferences in natural language processing and machine learning. Across the reviewed articles, we find patterns related to the measured phenomena, tasks, and scoring metrics which undermine the validity of the resulting claims. To address these shortcomings, we provide eight key recommendations and detailed actionable guidance to researchers and practitioners in developing LLM benchmarks.

NeurIPS Conference 2023 Conference Paper

DataPerf: Benchmarks for Data-Centric AI Development

  • Mark Mazumder
  • Colby Banbury
  • Xiaozhe Yao
  • Bojan Karlaš
  • William Gaviria Rojas
  • Sudnya Diamos
  • Greg Diamos
  • Lynn He

Machine learning research has long focused on models rather than datasets, and prominent datasets are used for common ML tasks without regard to the breadth, difficulty, and faithfulness of the underlying problems. Neglecting the fundamental importance of data has given rise to inaccuracy, bias, and fragility in real-world applications, and research is hindered by saturation across existing dataset benchmarks. In response, we present DataPerf, a community-led benchmark suite for evaluating ML datasets and data-centric algorithms. We aim to foster innovation in data-centric AI through competition, comparability, and reproducibility. We enable the ML community to iterate on datasets, instead of just architectures, and we provide an open, online platform with multiple rounds of challenges to support this iterative development. The first iteration of DataPerf contains five benchmarks covering a wide spectrum of data-centric techniques, tasks, and modalities in vision, speech, acquisition, debugging, and diffusion prompting, and we support hosting new contributed benchmarks from the community. The benchmarks, online evaluation platform, and baseline implementations are open source, and the MLCommons Association will maintain DataPerf to ensure long-term benefits to academia and industry.

NeurIPS Conference 2023 Conference Paper

VisoGender: A dataset for benchmarking gender bias in image-text pronoun resolution

  • Siobhan Mackenzie Hall
  • Fernanda Gonçalves Abrantes
  • Hanwen Zhu
  • Grace Sodunke
  • Aleksandar Shtedritski
  • Hannah Rose Kirk

We introduce VisoGender, a novel dataset for benchmarking gender bias in vision-language models. We focus on occupation-related biases within a hegemonic system of binary gender, inspired by Winograd and Winogender schemas, where each image is associated with a caption containing a pronoun relationship of subjects and objects in the scene. VisoGender is balanced by gender representation in professional roles, supporting bias evaluation in two ways: i) resolution bias, where we evaluate the difference between pronoun resolution accuracies for image subjects with gender presentations perceived as masculine versus feminine by human annotators and ii) retrieval bias, where we compare ratios of professionals perceived to have masculine and feminine gender presentations retrieved for a gender-neutral search query. We benchmark several state-of-the-art vision-language models and find that they demonstrate bias in resolving binary gender in complex scenes. While the direction and magnitude of gender bias depends on the task and the model being evaluated, captioning models are generally less biased than Vision-Language Encoders.

NeurIPS Conference 2021 Conference Paper

Bias Out-of-the-Box: An Empirical Analysis of Intersectional Occupational Biases in Popular Generative Language Models

  • Hannah Rose Kirk
  • Yennie Jun
  • Filippo Volpin
  • Haider Iqbal
  • Elias Benussi
  • Frederic Dreyer
  • Aleksandar Shtedritski
  • Yuki Asano

The capabilities of natural language models trained on large-scale data have increased immensely over the past few years. Open source libraries such as HuggingFace have made these models easily available and accessible. While prior research has identified biases in large language models, this paper considers biases contained in the most popular versions of these models when applied `out-of-the-box' for downstream tasks. We focus on generative language models as they are well-suited for extracting biases inherited from training data. Specifically, we conduct an in-depth analysis of GPT-2, which is the most downloaded text generation model on HuggingFace, with over half a million downloads per month. We assess biases related to occupational associations for different protected categories by intersecting gender with religion, sexuality, ethnicity, political affiliation, and continental name origin. Using a template-based data collection pipeline, we collect 396K sentence completions made by GPT-2 and find: (i) The machine-predicted jobs are less diverse and more stereotypical for women than for men, especially for intersections; (ii) Intersectional interactions are highly relevant for occupational associations, which we quantify by fitting 262 logistic models; (iii) For most occupations, GPT-2 reflects the skewed gender and ethnicity distribution found in US Labor Bureau data, and even pulls the societally-skewed distribution towards gender parity in cases where its predictions deviate from real labor market observations. This raises the normative question of what language models \textit{should} learn - whether they should reflect or correct for existing inequalities.

v2026.09.13