Political audits of large language models (LLMs) usually reduce each to one point on a political compass. But that resting point barely matters in deployment: a model must land somewhere, and what counts is how far, and in which directions, its answers can be steered.
Warning: This paper studies stereotypes and biases, and contains potentially disturbing examples, used for illustration purposes only. Our findings should not be interpreted as an argument against alignment.
arXiv:2606. 05183v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models are increasingly deployed as high-stakes advisors, yet standard alignment benchmarks treat sycophancy as a binary failure mode.
By Patrick Keough
arXiv:2606. 16127v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The worldwide surge of authoritarianism, combined with the increasing central role in users' everyday lives, raises the question of to what extent specific models exhibit or promote authoritarian attitudes and characteristics.
By Andreas Einwiller, Max Klabunde, Florian Lemmerich
arXiv:2606. 28335v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We argue, with systematic empirical evidence, that a large language model's political ideology is not a fixed point, but a conditional distribution $\mathbb{P}($position$\mid$context$)$ over a real political space.
By Adib Sakhawat, Syed Rifat Raiyan, Tahsin Islam, Takia Farhin, Hasan Mahmud, Md Kamrul Hasan
As users increasingly turn to Large Language Models (LLMs) for information and advice on political matters, particularly during election periods, the political preferences expressed by these systems have become a matter of public interest. Prior research has shown that interactions with LLMs can influence users' political attitudes and choices, raising questions about how these models themselves evaluate political actors.
arXiv:2607. 20487v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to answer questions about political information, including in election-adjacent information settings where factual errors and ideological distortions are high-stakes.
By Chendi Wang, Liam Cunningham, Tom Yishay, Jieying Chen
arXiv:2606. 01060v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Preference alignment has substantially improved the observable behavior of large language models, yet it remains unclear what alignment changes internally.
By Partha Pratim Saha, Samarth Raina, Mayur Parvatikar, Amit Dhanda, Vinija Jain, Aman Chadha, Amitava Das
arXiv:2601. 21433v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Language models are increasingly consulted on ethically consequential questions, yet the stance a model expresses may not survive a change in framing.
By Katherine Elkins, Jon Chun
arXiv:2605. 28850v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: We study behavioral alignment and representation dynamics of large language model (LLM) agents in financial decision environments.
By Weicheng Xue
arXiv:2606. 12747v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Safety-relevant studies of language models, including alignment and jailbreaking evaluations and AI control protocols, often rely on prefilling model outputs.
By Andy Wang, Parv Mahajan, David Demitri Africa, Alexandra Souly, Jordan Taylor, Robert Kirk
arXiv:2606. 08172v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) increasingly mediate high-stakes interactions in finance, medicine, and mental-health support, yet users have limited control over how these systems communicate.
By Manuele Reani, Hongjian Zhang, Hongyu Tian