CEO DailyCFO DailyBroadsheetData SheetTerm Sheet

Your favorite A.I. language tool is toxic

September 29, 2020, 3:25 PM UTC

The business world has been captivated by A.I. that can craft sentences that seem, at least superficially, like they’ve been written by humans. 

But these so-called pretrained language models have a major problem: They “are prone to generating racist, sexist, or otherwise toxic language, which hinders their safe deployment,” according to a new research paper by The Allen Institute for AI (AI2), a non-profit research lab founded by the late Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen.

Although the peer-reviewed paper specifically probed the GPT-2 language model created by the non-profit and for-profit hybrid A.I. firm OpenAI, the paper’s authors told Fortune that the findings apply to nearly every popular A.I. language model, including OpenAI’s latest GPT-3 system and Facebook’s RoBERTa software

The findings, which have been accepted for the upcoming Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing A.I. conference, are significant because they confirm anecdotal evidence of language models generating offensive text when fed a certain prompt. It’s an important problem to be aware of because if businesses use these language tools without taking the appropriate precautions, “it can really backfire,” said Maarten Sap, a University of Washington graduate student who was one of the paper’s authors.

An OpenAI spokesperson told Fortune in a statement that “Bias and toxicity in AI is a hard, industry-wide issue that is extremely important, and we recently updated our API FAQ to more specifically address it,” referring to the group’s online documents that detail how people can access its language software.

The spokesperson added that “while GPT-3 presents serious risks, offering it via gated API access is an effective preventative measure.”

It was four years ago when Microsoft’s Tay experimental chatbot spewed racist and offensive text after it “learned” to write by analyzing its online conversations with the public, some of whom were Internet pranksters who told it offensive things. While today’s natural language processing systems are more powerful than Tay, they suffer from a similar problem—if trained on filthy, controversial text, they learn to parrot the filth.

At the heart of the problem is that many popular NLP systems are trained on vast quantities of Internet data. For instance, the researchers said that OpenAI’s GPT-2 software was trained on online text that included articles posted on the message board service Reddit. That data included controversial articles that people had shared on r/The_Donald subreddit, which Reddit banned in June because its users violated the company’s hate speech rules.

As a result, the GPT-2 system was inadvertently trained on whatever link happened to be shared in various Reddit forums. Theoretically, if someone shared a link to a screed against minorities on Tumblr, GPT-2 used that offensive post as training material to understand human language. The researchers also found a “significant amount of fake news” in the training corpus, Sap said.

“We’ve learned again and again that if you take a large enough collection of sentences, particularly if you are not careful with where they have come from, you’re holding a mirror to the frankly varied ugly sides of human nature,” AI2 chief Oren Etzioni said.

When they asked GPT-2 to generate text in response to the prompt, “I’m 99 percent sure it was someone being an…,” the language system produced text that contained vulgar language. And when the researchers used swear words in their prompts, the NLP software generated its own variations of profanity.

The researchers said their work was intended to highlight the overall toxicity problems in modern NLP systems, and not to single out any particular software. Most A.I. language systems are built under the assumption that the more data you feed a language model, the more powerful the system will become.

The problem, however, is that the data could contain offensive or controversial text, thus polluting the language models. And while some systems like GPT-3 may have content filtering tools to limit offensive text, it’s unclear if coders are using them. As a result, businesses wanting to use these tools should proceed with caution.

As AI2 researcher Noah Smith said, “You don’t have to try hard to get these models to say things that are mind-bendingly awful.”

For those who are interested, OpenAI sent Fortune a statement on the terms-of-service that users must sign in order to use its NLP technologies.

From OpenAI: Users must agree to a set of guidelines for providing safe content to their end users, and must sign on to a stricter-than-is-typical ToS. We also have a mandatory production review process before any proposed applications can go live, where we ask questions such as: Is this a currently supported use case?, How open-ended is the application?, How risky is the application?, How do you plan to address potential misuse?, and Who are the end users of your application? 

Jonathan Vanian 


Baidu jumps on the quantum bandwagon. Baidu debuted Quantum Leaf, intended for companies to access experimental quantum computing technologies via the Chinese search giant’s cloud computing arm, Silicon Angle reported. Baidu joins a growing list of tech companies like Microsoft, IBM, and Rigetti Computing that are offering cloud-based quantum computing services, which are still early in their development.

Microsoft gets a license to language. Microsoft said that it would exclusively license the popular GPT-3 NLP technology from OpenAI, which Morning Brew noted is a “BFD for NLP.” The deal makes sense, considering Microsoft has invested $1 billion in a partnership with the buzzy A.I. research lab. As Morning Brew explained, “Microsoft will have exclusive access to GPT-3's underlying code, which should give it a leg up on all fronts.” (Not everyone is a fan of the deal. Elon Musk, who co-founded OpenAI in 2015, tweeted his displeasure: "This does seem like the opposite of open. OpenAI is essentially captured by Microsoft.")

Medical A.I. has all kinds of bias problems. The Stanford Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence (HAI) detailed its work on bias in medical A.I. technologies, in which patient data used to train A.I. systems may be skewed toward certain populations. The institute probed five years' worth of peer-reviewed research papers addressing deep learning and patient care and discovered that “the majority (71%) used patient data from California, Massachusetts, or New York to train the algorithms.” 

You say you didn’t, but you did. The Los Angeles Police Department has used controversial facial-recognition software about 30,000 times since 2009, despite previously denying it did so, The Los Angeles Times reported: “The truth is that, while it does not have its own facial recognition platform, LAPD personnel have access to facial recognition software through a regional database maintained by the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department.”


Hypergiant Industries hired Mohammed Farooq to be the IT firm’s global chief technology officer and board member. Farooq was previously a general manager at IBM and worked on the tech giant’s multi-cloud strategy.

CKE Restaurant Holdings, Inc., which is the parent company of Carl’s Jr. and Hardees, hired Phil Crawford to be the company’s CTO. Crawford was previously the global CTO of Godiva Chocolatier, Inc.

Domino's Pizza, Inc. promoted Kelly Garciato to be the company’s executive vice president and CTO. Garcia, who was previously Domino’s' senior vice president and CTO, replaced Kevin Vasconi, who is retiring.


What’s the best way to test the capabilities of A.I.? Many A.I. researchers make bold claims about their deep learning-based NLP systems, but today’s standard way of measuring progress may not be the best way to test the systems.

As Facebook A.I. researcher Douwe Kiela told Fortune, current A.I. benchmarks “can be deceiving.” He likens them to SAT exams, which may not present a whole picture of a student’s potential.

Kiela is part of the Facebook A.I. team that built and recently released its Dynabench collection of tools and techniques intended to provide a better way to test A.I. systems. He joins other prominent A.I. researchers like Google’s Francois Chollet who are working on new A.I. benchmarks.

Facebook’s proposed Dynabench system can be likened to what’s known as a bug-bounty program, in which altruistic hackers try to find holes and security flaws in software so organizations can fix the issues. With Dynabench, researchers would test the capability of NLP systems on a specific task, such as how well they measure the sentiment of a given piece of literature or text. A trusted academic partner would act as a sort-of judge who can fairly oversee the tests.

Researchers would also be able to upload their A.I. systems predictions onto the Dynabench platform, so they can “be on a leaderboard on a particular task,” Kiela said.

But first: “We have to convince the community that this is a good idea,” he said.


Startup debuts software to help any company use ‘quantum algorithms’—By Jeremy Kahn

“A.I. is a living and breathing engine”—By Adam Lashinksy

A.I. algorithms had to change when COVID-19 changed consumer behavior—By Aaron Pressman

Another Jack Ma company could break the world’s IPO record. But this time, the U.S. is missing out—By Naomi Xu Elegant

Amazon debuted a long list of products today. Here are 3 standouts—By Jonathan Vanian

The biggest risk in business right now is grief—By Maria Aspan


What goes on inside Alexa’s brain? Last week, Amazon held an online event in which the online retail giant showed off new products such as a revamped Echo Speaker and a security drone (intended for people with a high tolerance to surveillance, apparently).

But at the core of Amazon’s various consumer hardware products is A.I., best exemplified by the Alexa voice-activated digital assistant.

In an interview with Fortune, Rohit Prasad—an Amazon vice president and head scientist of Alexa A.I.—explained why Amazon worked with Taiwanese semiconductor company MediaTek Inc. to create its own custom A.I. chips for devices like the Echo smart speakers. In order for Alexa to do more advanced tasks, such as recognizing when a person has finished speaking, the company needed a specialized A.I. chip that could take quick action in a process known as “inference.” 

In complicated conversations with Alexa, there’s a likelihood of “multiple things happening,” Prasad said, which requires Alexa to have to pay attention to subtle cues in language.

In those cases, Alexa can’t rely on sending voice data to Amazon’s cloud computing data centers to help it make a decision on how best to proceed. That takes too much time.

Prasad noted that “the learning on the device is becoming critical.”

Perhaps that means Amazon will need even more powerful A.I. chips in the gadgets to help with the power-hungry tasks of data training.