Should I Build It Should I Build It
27 Jun 2025
GitHub

I want to build a bias checker for llm outputs to see if the llm ...

...outputs are not discriminatory or toxic or bias

Confidence
Engagement
Net use signal
Net buy signal

Idea type: Freemium

People love using similar products but resist paying. You’ll need to either find who will pay or create additional value that’s worth paying for.

Should You Build It?

Build but think about differentiation and monetization.

Your are here

You're entering a market where there's a growing awareness of the need to check LLM outputs for bias, toxicity, and discrimination. With 20 similar products already out there, the landscape is becoming competitive. The IDEA CATEGORY is Freemium, which means that people are open to using such tools but are also likely to resist paying for it. Therefore, you'll need to identify and highlight what makes your product different from the others and you will also have to figure out how to monetize it. Engagement with existing solutions is moderate, with an average of 5 comments per product. This suggests people are interested, but you will have to work to capture their attention. Several competing products focus on LLM vulnerability scanning, fact-checking, and red teaming. To break through, focus on a niche or provide a significantly more robust and user-friendly solution than what's currently available.

Recommendations

  1. Start by focusing on a specific type of bias or a specific industry. Given the freemium nature of this category, this will allow you to deeply solve the core problem for a specific audience and charge them for it. For example, you might focus on detecting gender bias in financial advice generated by LLMs.
  2. Develop a freemium model that provides basic bias checking for free, but charges for more advanced features. This could include detailed reports, custom bias definitions, or integration with CI/CD pipelines.
  3. Explore potential partnerships with LLM providers or companies that integrate LLMs into their products. Offering a bias-checking solution as part of their suite could be a valuable selling point for them.
  4. Consider focusing on team or enterprise solutions. As suggested by the provided IDEA CATEGORY, it is easier to charge teams rather than individuals. Teams and enterprises are more likely to pay for solutions that ensure compliance and reduce legal risks, because they are the ones who are most exposed.
  5. Actively seek feedback from users and iterate on your product based on their needs. User feedback from similar products highlights the importance of flexibility, ease of use, and integration with existing workflows.
  6. Address the criticisms leveled at similar products. Many users would like to see dynamic prompts, customizability, and cost metrics.
  7. Consider building in more explicit support for Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems, as that was requested by users on similar products. This could be a differentiating factor.
  8. Focus on creating an easy to understand UI, as that was specifically praised by users on the similar product, Langtail. A spreadsheet-like interface might be a good starting point.

Questions

  1. Given the competition in the LLM bias detection space, what specific niche or underserved area can you target to differentiate your product and attract early adopters?
  2. Considering the freemium nature of this market, what premium features can you offer that would provide significant value to teams and enterprises, justifying a paid subscription?
  3. How can you leverage partnerships with LLM providers or integrators to distribute your bias-checking solution and gain a competitive edge?

Your are here

You're entering a market where there's a growing awareness of the need to check LLM outputs for bias, toxicity, and discrimination. With 20 similar products already out there, the landscape is becoming competitive. The IDEA CATEGORY is Freemium, which means that people are open to using such tools but are also likely to resist paying for it. Therefore, you'll need to identify and highlight what makes your product different from the others and you will also have to figure out how to monetize it. Engagement with existing solutions is moderate, with an average of 5 comments per product. This suggests people are interested, but you will have to work to capture their attention. Several competing products focus on LLM vulnerability scanning, fact-checking, and red teaming. To break through, focus on a niche or provide a significantly more robust and user-friendly solution than what's currently available.

Recommendations

  1. Start by focusing on a specific type of bias or a specific industry. Given the freemium nature of this category, this will allow you to deeply solve the core problem for a specific audience and charge them for it. For example, you might focus on detecting gender bias in financial advice generated by LLMs.
  2. Develop a freemium model that provides basic bias checking for free, but charges for more advanced features. This could include detailed reports, custom bias definitions, or integration with CI/CD pipelines.
  3. Explore potential partnerships with LLM providers or companies that integrate LLMs into their products. Offering a bias-checking solution as part of their suite could be a valuable selling point for them.
  4. Consider focusing on team or enterprise solutions. As suggested by the provided IDEA CATEGORY, it is easier to charge teams rather than individuals. Teams and enterprises are more likely to pay for solutions that ensure compliance and reduce legal risks, because they are the ones who are most exposed.
  5. Actively seek feedback from users and iterate on your product based on their needs. User feedback from similar products highlights the importance of flexibility, ease of use, and integration with existing workflows.
  6. Address the criticisms leveled at similar products. Many users would like to see dynamic prompts, customizability, and cost metrics.
  7. Consider building in more explicit support for Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems, as that was requested by users on similar products. This could be a differentiating factor.
  8. Focus on creating an easy to understand UI, as that was specifically praised by users on the similar product, Langtail. A spreadsheet-like interface might be a good starting point.

Questions

  1. Given the competition in the LLM bias detection space, what specific niche or underserved area can you target to differentiate your product and attract early adopters?
  2. Considering the freemium nature of this market, what premium features can you offer that would provide significant value to teams and enterprises, justifying a paid subscription?
  3. How can you leverage partnerships with LLM providers or integrators to distribute your bias-checking solution and gain a competitive edge?

  • Confidence: High
    • Number of similar products: 20
  • Engagement: Medium
    • Average number of comments: 5
  • Net use signal: 9.3%
    • Positive use signal: 10.4%
    • Negative use signal: 1.1%
  • Net buy signal: 0.0%
    • Positive buy signal: 0.0%
    • Negative buy signal: 0.0%

This chart summarizes all the similar products we found for your idea in a single plot.

The x-axis represents the overall feedback each product received. This is calculated from the net use and buy signals that were expressed in the comments. The maximum is +1, which means all comments (across all similar products) were positive, expressed a willingness to use & buy said product. The minimum is -1 and it means the exact opposite.

The y-axis captures the strength of the signal, i.e. how many people commented and how does this rank against other products in this category. The maximum is +1, which means these products were the most liked, upvoted and talked about launches recently. The minimum is 0, meaning zero engagement or feedback was received.

The sizes of the product dots are determined by the relevance to your idea, where 10 is the maximum.

Your idea is the big blueish dot, which should lie somewhere in the polygon defined by these products. It can be off-center because we use custom weighting to summarize these metrics.

Similar products

Relevance

Prompts to Reduce LLM Political Bias

17 Jun 2024 Artificial Intelligence

Each LLM possesses a unique as sometimes transient political bias, which is problematic for many business applications. Here are prompts I've had success with in reducing this bias. https://github.com/Shane-Burns-Dot-US/Unspun/blob/main/readm...

Avatar
2
2
Relevance

Automated red teaming for your LLM app

13 Jun 2024 Developer Tools

Hi HN,I built this open-source LLM red teaming tool based on my experience scaling LLMs at a big co to millions of users... and seeing all the bad things people did.How it works:- Uses an unaligned model to create toxic inputs- Runs these inputs through your app using different techniques: raw, prompt injection, and a chain-of-thought jailbreak that tries to re-frame the request to trick the LLM.- Probes a bunch of other failure cases (e.g. will your customer support bot recommend a competitor? Does it think it can process a refund when it can't? Will it leak your user's address?)- Built on top of promptfoo, a popular eval toolOne interesting thing about my approach is that almost none of the tests are hardcoded. They are all tailored toward the specific purpose of your application, which makes the attacks more potent.Some of these tests reflect fundamental, unsolved issues with LLMs. Other failures can be solved pretty trivially by prompting or safeguards.Most businesses will never ship LLMs without at least being able to quantify these types of risks. So I hope this helps someone out. Happy building!

Users recommend promptfoo for evaluations, highlighting its flexibility and ease of use. They also appreciate its dynamic prompts and providers for continuous LLM evaluation.

The product lacks dynamic prompts and providers, which limits its flexibility and adaptability to different user needs.

Avatar
23
2
2
23
Relevance

Deepchecks LLM Evaluation - Validate, monitor, and safeguard LLM-based apps

28 Nov 2023 Artificial Intelligence Developer Tools

Continuously validate LLM-based applications including LLM hallucinations, performance metrics, and potential pitfalls throughout the entire lifecycle from pre-deployment and internal experimentation to production.🚀

The Product Hunt launch of Deepchecks LLM assessment received overwhelmingly positive feedback, with numerous users congratulating the team and praising the product as amazing, innovative, and much-needed. Users highlighted its potential as a game-changer for LLM evaluation, providing invaluable insights quickly to validate, safeguard, and improve model performance. Many expressed excitement to try the tool, especially regarding LLM evaluation metrics, and learn more through the webinar. A question was raised about Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) support. Overall, Deepchecks is recognized for consistently delivering quality and useful tools.

Avatar
219
53
9.4%
53
219
9.4%
Relevance

Aletheia | TruthCheck - Fact-Checking LLM Output

10 Oct 2024 Artificial Intelligence Productivity Chrome Extensions

Aletheia | TruthCheck is a fact-checking tool for LLM output. It cross-references information that has been produced by one LLM with several verification models and verified data sources. Chrome Extension + Desktop App

The Product Hunt launch is receiving congratulations, specifically to @arnestrickmann. Commenters highlight the timely idea of tackling AI hallucinations and improving accuracy as a key aspect of the launch.

Avatar
14
2
2
14
Relevance

Factuality: An LLM based fact checker for any text

01 Apr 2024 Artificial Intelligence

Have you ever wanted to fact check your favorite new twitter rant or wanted to show a colleague that you are right after all about that feature in a PR comment.This is made for you! Based on the idea from the goolge paper "long-form-factuality" i have built this tool to basically fact check any text.Some features are: - LLM based claim extraction, fact checking and conclusion - CLI and Library support for Python - json, markdown and console output - allow/blocklists for specific websites so you can tune it to have more research focus or work without specific news sites - reference extraction of the original statement - check claims with multiple citations instead of only one - use bing or google for searching resultsHope you find it interesting and would love to get a star if you find it valuable.

Avatar
2
2
Relevance

Smell – A framework for aligning LLM evaluators to human feedback

13 Oct 2024 Artificial Intelligence

We've built SMELL (Subject-Matter Expert Language Liaison), a new framework that combines human expertise with LLMs to create feedback-informed, domain-specific LLM evaluators. One of the biggest issues with current evaluation methods (heuristics, assertions, LLM-as-a-judge etc.) is that it's difficult for them to match up with and capture human preferences.SMELL addresses this by putting human feedback at the core of the evaluation process. It scales up a small set of human-provided feedback into evaluators that reflect the standards and nuances of specific industries or use-cases. Instead of a one-size-fits-all approach, you get evaluations that actually align with human judgment in those areas.If you're curious to try it out, we've made it easy by offering both a notebook and a hosted API so you can test SMELL with your own LLMs and datasets:- Notebook: https://colab.research.google.com/drive/1wCRwU5KQvnRSDxkubU9... - Hosted API: https://smell.quotientai.co/Check out the blog post for more details: https://www.quotientai.co/post/subject-matter-expert-languag...We are in the process in writing up the findings into a paper, and are planning to provide the full details on SMELL (incl. prompts).If you’re interested in building a custom judge tailored to your specific use case, or if you'd like to contribute to our research, we'd love to collaborate! You can share your datasets with us at research@quotientai.co. We'll publish results based on the data you provide, with full attribution and recognition of your contributions.In the meantime, we'd love to hear your feedback and see what you think!

Avatar
5
5
Relevance

Talc – Custom benchmarking for LLM apps

01 Nov 2023 Artificial Intelligence Developer Tools

Hey HN! We recently launched our tool for testing AI systems. The goal is to make it really easy for teams to maintain benchmarks for things like "factual accuracy in QA". So if you're building a customer support bot, you can test (during development) how often it lies about your products. It's all automatically graded, and shows you only the interesting results.It's essentially a scaled up version of manually entering a bunch of test cases and seeing how it performs.If you're interested in LLM testing, evals, or benchmarking, lets chat!

Avatar
1
1
Relevance

Ragas – Open-source library for evals and testing RAG systems

20 Mar 2024 Artificial Intelligence Open Source Developer Tools

Ragas is an open-source library designed for evaluating and testing RAG (Retrieval-Augmented Generation) and other LLM applications. It offers a diverse set of metrics and methods, including synthetic test data generation, to help you assess your RAG applications. Ragas was initially developed to address our own needs for evaluating RAG chatbots last year.### Problems Ragas Can Solve:- How can you select the best components for your RAG, such as the retriever, reranker, and LLM?- How can you create a test dataset without incurring significant expenses and time?We believe there's a need for an open-source standard for evaluating and testing LLM applications. Our vision is to establish this standard for the community. We're addressing this challenge by adapting ideas from the traditional ML lifecycle for LLM applications.### ML Testing Evolved for LLM ApplicationsRagas is founded on the principles of metrics-driven development. Our goal is to develop and innovate techniques inspired by the latest research to address the challenges in evaluating and testing LLM applications.We don't think that merely building a sophisticated tracing tool will solve the evaluation and testing challenges. Instead, we aim to tackle these issues from a foundational level. To this end, we're introducing methods such as automated synthetic test data curation, metrics, and feedback utilization. These approaches are inspired by lessons learned from deploying stochastic models throughout our careers as machine learning engineers.While our current focus is on RAG pipelines, we intend to expand Ragas to test a broad spectrum of compound systems. This includes systems based on RAGs, agentic workflows, and various transformations.### Try RagasExperience Ragas by trying it out in Google Colab [here](https://colab.research.google.com/github/shahules786/openai-...). For more information, read our [documentation](https://docs.ragas.io/).We would love to hear feedback from the Hacker News community :)

Users show interest in synthetic test data generation, particularly for machine learning and large language models (LLMs), with inquiries about cost and application in specific domains like ragas. There's curiosity about support for open-source models and how to use them for evaluation, with specific mention of Mixtral. The concept receives praise, and users are seeking practical information on implementation and integration.

Users have reported difficulties in adapting the machine learning testing features of the product.

Avatar
15
6
6
15
Relevance

Ragas – Open-source library for evaluating RAG pipelines

21 Mar 2024 Artificial Intelligence Open Source Developer Tools

Ragas is an open-source library for evaluating and testing RAG and other LLM applications. Github: https://docs.ragas.io/en/stable/, docs: https://docs.ragas.io/.Ragas provides you with different sets of metrics and methods like synthetic test data generation to help you evaluate your RAG applications. Ragas started off by scratching our own itch for evaluating our RAG chatbots last year.Problems Ragas can solve- How do you choose the best components for your RAG, such as the retriever, reranker, and LLM?- How do you formulate a test dataset without spending tons of money and time?We believe there needs to be an open-source standard for evaluating and testing LLM applications, and our vision is to build it for the community. We are tackling this challenge by evolving the ideas from the traditional ML lifecycle for LLM applications.ML Testing Evolved for LLM ApplicationsWe built Ragas on the principles of metrics-driven development and aim to develop and innovate techniques inspired by state-of-the-art research to solve the problems in evaluating and testing LLM applications.We don't believe that the problem of evaluating and testing applications can be solved by building a fancy tracing tool; rather, we want to solve the problem from a layer under the stack. For this, we are introducing methods like automated synthetic test data curation, metrics, and feedback utilisation, which are inspired by lessons learned from deploying stochastic models in our careers as ML engineers.While currently focused on RAG pipelines, our goal is to extend Ragas for testing a wide array of compound systems, including those based on RAGs, agentic workflows, and various transformations.Try out Ragas here https://colab.research.google.com/github/shahules786/openai-... in Google Colab. Read our docs - https://docs.ragas.io/ to know moreWe would love to hear feedback from the HN community :)

Users discussed Ragas, comparing it to Langchain, noting its potential for inlining code and customization, but questioning its long-term viability and compatibility with non-OpenAI models. Open Source Software (OSS) alternatives and the need for cost and performance metrics were highlighted. DeepEval was recommended for LLM evaluation, and there's interest in more OSS evaluation libraries. Users requested elaboration on performance ('perf') and cost, as well as estimates for requests and tokens. The tool's value for the LLM community and its ability to evolve were praised, alongside requests for tips and congratulations on the launch.

Users criticized the product for its limited core metrics, similarity to Langchain with less control, and lack of backward compatibility in ML libraries. Customization requirements were high, and there was no support for evaluating LLMs. Comparisons with DeepEval were requested, alongside the inclusion of cost and performance metrics. The term 'perf' was unclear, and users wanted cost and execution time estimates. The product needs to adapt to various LLM architectures and had issues with malformed JSONs. One user had no criticism.

Avatar
121
15
-6.7%
15
121
6.7%
Relevance

CLI for testing and evaluating LLM prompts and outputs

19 Jul 2023 Artificial Intelligence GitHub Developer Tools

Hi HN,This project has grown a lot recently and figure it's worth another submission. I use this tool for several LLM-based use cases that have over 100k DAU. It works pretty simply:1) Create a list of test cases2) Set up assertions for metrics/guardrails you care about, such as outputting only JSON or not saying "As an AI language model"3) Run tests as you make changes. Integrate with CI if desired.This makes LLM model and prompt selection easier because it reduces the process to something we're all familiar with: developing against test cases. You can iterate with confidence and avoid regressions.There are a bunch of startups popping up in this space, but I think it's important to have something that is local (private), on the command line (easy to use in the development loop), and open-source.

Avatar
2
2
Relevance

I made a website to limit sensitive info to LLMs

13 Mar 2024 Developer Tools

I made something that replaces sensitive (and proprietary) objects that you could have in your LLM query and replace it with a random noun. Your LLM response can be pasted back to get your answer with the original objects. Everything happens on the browser side, so this was a fun little project.

Users appreciate the tool's ability to replace sensitive objects in LLM queries with random nouns. There is interest in AI sharing and filtering for logs and screenshots. Some users question the model's ability to decrypt without a key. While the encryption explanation on GitHub readme is found confusing, the replacement feature is considered easy to understand.

Users criticized the product for lacking a harmful information filter and relying on a blacklist instead. They questioned the purpose of encryption if the model itself has the key, and found the explanation of encryption on the GitHub readme to be confusing.

Avatar
1
4
25.0%
4
1
25.0%
Relevance

UpTrain (YC W23) – open-source tool to evaluate LLM response quality

22 Aug 2023 Artificial Intelligence

Hello, we are Shikha and Sourabh, founders of UpTrain(YC W23) - an open-source tool to evaluate the performance of your LLM applications on aspects such as correctness, tonality, hallucination, fluency, etc.The Problem: Unlike traditional Machine learning or Deep learning models where we always have a unique Ground Truth and can define metrics like Precision, Recall, accuracy, etc. to quantify the model’s performance, LLMs are trickier and it is very difficult to estimate if their response is correct or not. If you are using GPT-4 to write a recruitment email, there is no unique correct email to do a word-to-word comparison against.As you build an LLM application, you want to compare it against different model providers, prompt configurations, etc., and figure out the best working combination. Instead of manually skimming through a couple of model responses, you want to run them through hundreds of test cases, aggregate their scores, and make an informed decision. Additionally, as your application generates responses for real user queries, you don’t want to wait for them to complain about the model inaccuracy, instead, you want to monitor the model’s performance over time and get alerted in case of any drifts.Again, at the core of it, you want a tool to evaluate the quality of your LLM response and assign quantitative scores.The Solution: To solve this, we are building UpTrain which has a set of evaluation metrics so that you can know when your application is going wrong. These metrics include traditional NLP metrics like Rogue, Bleu, etc., embeddings similarity metrics as well as model grading scores i.e. where we use LLMs to evaluate different aspects of your response. A few of these evaluation metrics include:1. Response Relevancy: Measures if the response contains any irrelevant information 2. Response Completeness: Measures if the response answers all aspects of the given question 3. Factual Accuracy: Measures hallucinations i.e. if the response has any made-up information or not with respect to the provided context 4. Retrieved Context Quality: Measures if the retrieved context has sufficient information to answer the given question 5. Response Tonality: Measures if the response aligns with a specific persona or desired tone etc.We have designed workflows so that you can easily add your testing dataset, configure which checks you want to run (you can also define custom checks suitable for your use case) and conveniently access the results via Streamlit dashboards.UpTrain also has experimentation capabilities where you can specify different prompt variations and models to test across and use these quantitative checks to find the best configuration for your application.You can also use UpTrain to monitor your application’s performance and find avenues for improvement. We integrate directly with your databases (BigQuery, Postgres, MongoDB, etc.) and can run daily evaluations.We’ve launched the tool under an Apache 2.0 license to make it easy for everyone to integrate it into their LLM workflows. Additionally, we also provide managed service (with a free trial) where you can run LLM evaluations via an API request or through UpTrain testing console.We would love for you to try it out and give your feedback.Links: Demo: https://demo.uptrain.ai/evals_demo/ Github repo: https://github.com/uptrain-ai/uptrain Create an account (free): https://uptrain.ai/dashboard UpTrain testing console (need an account): https://demo.uptrain.ai/dashboard Website: https://uptrain.ai/

Avatar
12
12
Relevance

Langtail 1.0 - The low-code platform for testing AI apps

30 Oct 2024 Artificial Intelligence SaaS Developer Tools

LLM testing made easy with a spreadsheet-like interface. Score tests with natural language, pattern matching, or code. Optimize LLM apps by experimenting with models, parameters, and prompts. Gain insights from test results and analytics.

Langtail's Product Hunt launch received positive feedback for its cost analytics, UI, and simplification of LLM testing and optimization. Users find the spreadsheet-like interface and cost-to-performance metrics particularly valuable. Several users congratulated the team on the launch, expressing excitement and anticipation, while some highlighted its potential for AI product teams and AI deployment acceleration. Integration, SDK, open-source for CI/CD, self-hosting options, bulk updates, version control, and RAG evals were mentioned as areas for improvement or features of interest, along with pricing model concerns.

Users expressed concerns about the absence of an open-source version for CI/CD integration and emphasized that the pricing model could be a significant adoption barrier. Key feature requests included bulk updates, version control, dynamic prompts, and RAG evaluations. One user desired the ability to directly craft response formats within the Langtail interface.

Avatar
500
25
40.0%
25
500
40.0%
Top