The paper introduces Population Fidelity, an evaluation framework for assessing how well large language models (LLMs) represent human population attitudes. It focuses on three dimensions: group-level accuracy, between-group variation, and the structure of that variation. Using the framework, the authors replicate a prior study on machine bias and test cultural fine-tuning, finding that while fine-tuning improves overall alignment, it does not enhance representation of within-population differences.
By Neemias B. da Silva, Martin Lukk, Ali Sutani, Abhishek Moturu, Harris Yang, Daniel Silver, Matt Ratto, Thiago H. Silva
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
The study evaluates how large language models (LLMs) interpret verbal probability expressions by mapping words to numbers and testing consistency across 19 models. Results show that LLMs largely mirror human benchmarks—preserving word order, recovering key anchor points, and reflecting the high variance of the term "possible"—but they exhibit a systematic upward bias for negative expressions like "unlikely" and "improbable." Explanation elicitation reduces within‑model variance but increases divergence between models, while a bidirectional roundtrip test reveals that leading models maintain coherent internal representations.
By Christos Petridis, Konstantinos Pelechrinis, Zoran Obradovic
Large language models increasingly produce and interpret verbal probability expressions, yet whether these expressions carry consistent meaning across models (or match human perceptions of uncertainty...
arXiv:2608.29266v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Researchers increasingly treat LLM survey responses as a proxy for human cultural values. This includes projecting model outputs onto instruments lik...
By An Duy Nguyen, Muhammad Aurangzeb Ahmad
arXiv:2510. 12857v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are now widely deployed in user-facing applications, reaching hundreds of millions of users worldwide.
By Robin Staab, Jasper Dekoninck, Maximilian Baader, Martin Vechev
The paper argues that traditional global calibration metrics, such as Expected Calibration Error and Brier Score, are confounded by differences in model accuracy when comparing large language models. It introduces ACE, an accuracy‑controlled evaluation framework that offers Instance‑Aligned, Distribution‑Aligned, and Candidate‑Aligned views to provide fairer cross‑model comparisons. Experiments across various benchmarks reveal that many reported calibration advantages disappear after accuracy control and that model rankings often reverse, indicating that raw global metrics are unreliable for cross‑model calibration assessment.
By Zhichao Yang, Caiqi Zhang, Ruihan Yang, Chengzu Li, Nigel Collier, Deqing Yang
arXiv:2606. 07422v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models are increasingly used to answer culturally grounded questions across languages, yet it remains unclear whether local cultural knowledge is better accessed through English or the local language.
By Yang Zhang, Xiao Fei, Amr Mohamed, Sarah Almeida Carneiro, Mersin Konomi, Mingmeng Geng, Ahmed Asaad, Guokan Shang, Michalis Vazirgiannis
arXiv:2609.00565v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Cultural fine-tuning has become the de facto paradigm for building culture-aware large language models (LLMs), yet existing optimization exclusively...
By Jingshen Zhang, Shaoyang Xu, Wenxuan Zhang
arXiv:2607. 20526v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in settings where fluent but incorrect answers can be costly.
By Matthew ffrench-Constant, Daniel Yang, Xinmeng Huang, Sanyam Kapoor
The paper introduces Cultural Divergence Preservation (CDP), a new diagnostic for evaluating whether large language models (LLMs) preserve cross‑country differences when used as synthetic survey respondents. CDP uses a single human calibration to detect cultural flattening (reduced divergence) or caricature (increased divergence) and is shown to vary monotonically with cross‑country divergence, unlike conventional Jensen–Shannon divergence metrics. Experiments across multiple LLM backbones, prompting methods, and survey domains reveal that CDP uncovers systematic discrepancies with traditional fidelity metrics, highlighting that methods favored by those metrics can still produce strong flattening.
By Yeeun Chae, Yewon Choi, Seunghyun Lee, IL Im
The paper introduces AttriBench, a benchmark dataset that balances author fame and demographics to study quote attribution in large language models (LLMs). Using AttriBench, the authors evaluate 11 popular LLMs and find that accurate attribution remains difficult, with significant disparities across race, gender, and intersectional groups. They also identify a new failure mode—suppression—where models omit attribution entirely, which is unevenly distributed across demographics and not reflected by standard accuracy metrics.
By Eliza Berman, Bella Chang, Daniel B. Neill, Emily Black