arXiv:2608. 06085v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Survey-country metadata can improve an LLM's forecast of an individual response when informative, yet the same cue may redirect the forecast when assigned at random.
arXiv:2607. 20441v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Every information ecosystem produces beliefs that shape strategic decisions.
Large language models are increasingly used as decision aids whose probability judgments shape downstream choices. Whether those judgments carry a systematic directional tilt has been hard to detect: calibration metrics aggregate unsigned errors, and naturalistic uncertainty offers no ground-truth probability.
arXiv:2512. 23847v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: We develop a statistical procedure to detect lookahead bias in economic forecasts generated by large language models (LLMs).
Prior work on human label variation (HLV) in natural language inference (NLI) has often relied on re-annotation resources that select items by disagreement level. An earlier study (arXiv:2607.
arXiv:2607. 23519v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Political audits of large language models (LLMs) usually reduce each to one point on a political compass.
arXiv:2606. 28963v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to simulate social survey responses, yet their outputs exhibit systematic biases: marginal distributions are skewed, response variance is poorly calibrated, and predictor-outcome relationships are attenuated.
arXiv:2607. 20454v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: All frontier large language models (LLMs) exhibit response drift -- producing outputs that deviate from expert-validated references -- yet the magnitude and structure of this drift remain uncharacterised by systematic human evaluation.
arXiv:2605. 27752v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Is verbalized confidence better calibrated than token likelihood?
arXiv:2607. 08065v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM-as-judge (Zheng et al.
arXiv:2607. 28968v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Renault, Bergeaud, and Bosquet (hereafter RBB) argue that dating LLM adoption as the first month in which an author's abstract is flagged induces a stopping-time selection that can produce a positive event-study path even when there is no causal effect.
arXiv:2607. 08046v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models fine-tuned for forecasting can be accurate yet poorly calibrated, and their chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning may not faithfully reflect the evidence behind a forecast.
arXiv:2608. 14903v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Quantitative forecasts of frontier artificial intelligence often connect dated targets to trends in benchmark scores, training compute, release time, or expert belief.