The study investigates how demographic identity is represented in a language model, using representational similarity analysis against Pew survey data across 169 demographic cells. It finds that standard last‑token read‑outs underestimate the model’s fidelity, while specific attention heads (notably L11 H16) capture demographic structure more accurately, though race‑based types remain weak. Causal interventions reveal that high fidelity does not guarantee causal use, and a 128‑dimensional probe of a single head improves alignment with survey truth but fails to recover per‑question group ordering.
arXiv:2607. 18310v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Synthetic-population tools increasingly run every individual as an independent large language model (LLM) agent.
By Gurkan Ozkan
arXiv:2609.15849v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Can LLMs reason through new information like humans, or do they merely retrieve cached opinions? This is critical for silicon sampling, where LLM per...
By Ahmed Wali, Hassaan Tayyab
The study evaluates whether large language models (LLMs) used as synthetic personas can predict real audience responses to marketing copy. Using thousands of headline A/B tests from the Upworthy Research Archive, the authors compare a ten-persona panel grounded in real audience demographics to a no-persona zero‑shot baseline that asks the model for a typical reader’s click likelihood. Results show that the no‑persona baseline outperforms the persona‑based approach, with higher predictive validity and top‑1 accuracy, indicating that forcing the model to role‑play specific personas introduces bias and noise.
By Alexandre Cristov\~ao Maiorano
The paper investigates how large language models (LLMs) from OpenAI and Anthropic exhibit probability bias when deciding whether to trust information from reporters of different racial descriptions. Using a two‑urn Bayesian game and 6,600 sessions, the authors find that models often refuse to assess a reporter’s credibility—especially for Black‑described reporters—yet when they do assess, Black reporters receive slightly higher trust. The bias is subtle, growing with reasoning effort, and is not detected by standard audits that compare average trust or only assessed cases.
By Christian Arnold, Ernesto Calvo, Guadalupe Gonzalez, Sebasti\'an Vallejo Vera, Tiago Ventura
arXiv:2609.14754v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Causal claims about large language model (LLM) internals rest on measurements. Those might include a projection, a cosine, an ablation delta, or an i...
By Orion Reblitz-Richardson
arXiv:2605.30381v2 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: When a language model is fine-tuned to produce systematically incorrect responses, does this training leave a structured, linearly recoverabl...
By Vahideh Zolfaghari
arXiv:2603.13911v2 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: A language model can give the wrong answer even when the correct answer is decodable from its intermediate states. To study this gap between decoda...
By Valeria Ruscio, Keiran Thompson
arXiv:2610.32309v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Why can a task-preserving rewrite turn a correct answer into a failure while a larger internal change leaves the answer intact? We develop a direction-...
By Zhibo Hu, Chen Wang, Yanfeng Shu, Liming Dong, Hye-young Paik, Liming Zhu
arXiv:2607. 13568v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Can a language model estimate its familiarity with an entity before generating an answer?
By Grzegorz Brzezinka
A 0.6B language model consistently answers YES to 1,200 logical tests, yet its behavior shows no discrimination. Linear probes reveal the correct verdict with high AUC (0.96) and transfer to unseen structures, but a single scalar readout fails due to a saturated decision threshold offset by +4.6 σ. Adjusting this threshold restores behavior accuracy from 50 % to 81 % and improves higher‑scale models, demonstrating that miscalibrated readouts, not hidden knowledge loss, drive performance gaps.
By Gnaneswar Villuri, Hashmath Shaik, Alex Doboli
arXiv:2609.35860v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Sampling based consistency is widely used for hallucination detection, yet aggregate performance can conceal systematic differences in which errors a...
By Pranav Darshan, Pranav A, Sravan Karthick T, Minal Moharir, Ivan P. Yamshchikov