Existing social bias benchmarks evaluate large language models mostly on fluent, well-formed English, reflecting native speaker usage and leaving non-native writers unrepresented. To address this gap,...
The paper presents a multilingual audit of stereotype bias in large language models (LLMs) using 12,000 locally written Reddit posts in English, Spanish, French, and German. It evaluates gender, racial, and religious bias across six models (three open-weight and three proprietary APIs) with a two-blank design to reduce grammatical cues, finding that religion shows the highest imbalance, Spanish leads in gender bias, and German in race and religion. The study highlights that aggregate scores can mask category- and context-specific biases, underscoring the need for detailed inspection before deploying LLMs in consequential settings.
arXiv:2604. 01925v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large Language Models increasingly suppress biased outputs when demographic identity is stated explicitly, yet may still exhibit implicit biases when identity is conveyed indirectly.
MBBQ (Multilingual Bias Benchmark for Question-answering) is a curated extension of the English BBQ dataset that includes Dutch, Spanish, and Turkish, designed to measure stereotypes across these languages while controlling for cultural differences and task accuracy. The dataset also provides a parallel control set to assess question-answering performance independently of bias. Experiments with several open-source and proprietary LLMs show that non‑English languages can exhibit greater bias than English, and cross‑lingual bias differences persist except in the most accurate models.
The paper introduces a bias depth score to differentiate between stable model preferences (Deep biases) and prompt‑dependent responses (Shallow biases) in large language models. By analyzing 4,442 opinion prompts across four models, it finds that only about a quarter of concentrated preferences persist after scenario reframing, indicating that most are shallow. The study shows Deep biases are more often inherited from pretraining and harder to remove through fine‑tuning or prompt‑based debiasing, highlighting the need to distinguish learned biases from prompt artifacts.
The paper introduces GPTBIAS, a framework that uses powerful large language models like GPT‑4 to evaluate bias in other LLMs. It employs specially crafted prompts called Bias Attack Instructions to probe for bias and outputs a bias score along with detailed information such as bias types, affected demographics, keywords, reasons, and improvement suggestions. Extensive experiments demonstrate the framework’s effectiveness and usability.
Large language models used as judges for social bias are affected by noisy text, such as typos and broken punctuation. In experiments with 3,822 stereotype-related responses, noise more often turns neutral judgments into biased ones than the reverse, with up to a 120‑fold difference. The effect is strongest at mild realistic noise levels and leads to systematic overestimation of bias, especially in fairness‑critical categories.
arXiv:2603. 23485v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Standard evaluation practices assume that large language model (LLM) outputs are stable when prompts are embedded in contextually equivalent discourses.
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to assess social bias in text, but the passages they evaluate often contain surface noise such as typos and broken punctuation. This study applied five realistic noise conditions at varying intensities to 3,822 stereotype‑related responses and compared bias judgments on noisy versus original text. The findings show that noise disproportionately turns neutral judgments into biased ones—up to 120 times more likely—while rarely converting biased judgments into neutral ones, and that the most fragile LLM judge exhibits the greatest distortion at mild noise levels. As LLMs become more robust, the bias distortion tends toward parity rather than reversal, meaning bias measured on noisy text is systematically overestimated, especially in fairness‑critical categories.
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.
arXiv:2603. 13891v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used for automated text annotation in tasks ranging from academic research to content moderation and hiring.
arXiv:2609.16993v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Models are now common in student assessment, but we know little about how student demographics affect their use. Sometimes, considerin...