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:2501. 02211v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) reproduce homogeneity bias -- the tendency to portray marginalized groups as more internally similar than dominant groups -- but whether this bias generalizes across models, is stable under different inference settings, or depends on how group identity is signaled remains unstudied.
By Messi H. J. Lee
Large Language Models (LLMs) frequently exhibit sycophancy, where they agree with a user's statement even when incorrect. While sycophancy is often treated as a single defined behavior, it can manifest in substantially distinct ways and circumstances, raising the question of whether this multi-faceted nature is reflected in its internal mechanisms.
arXiv:2607. 07003v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) frequently exhibit sycophancy, where they agree with a user's statement even when incorrect.
By Anthony Baez, Sheer Karny, Pat Pataranutaporn
arXiv:2607. 27232v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly shaping how we consume information and form our worldview.
By Haran Shani-Narkiss, Michael Fire, Oren Tsur
arXiv:2501. 02211v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) reproduce homogeneity bias -- the tendency to portray marginalized groups as more internally similar than dominant groups -- but whether this bias is stable or an artifact of inference settings has only been studied in single proprietary models.
By Messi H. J. Lee
arXiv:2607. 21558v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Building socially calibrated large language models, which can learn from others without simply yielding to them, requires more than reducing sycophancy as a one-dimensional failure mode.
By Baihui Wang, Bernard Koch
arXiv:2607. 18114v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Modern LLMs are alarmingly susceptible to surprisingly simple immaterial changes of input prompts: a casual hint, an incorrectly labeled few-shot example, or a fake prior assistant turn often flips an originally correct answer.
By Prakhar Gupta, Terry Jingchen Zhang, Florent Draye, Bernhard Sch\"olkopf, Zhijing Jin
Modern LLMs are alarmingly susceptible to surprisingly simple immaterial changes of input prompts: a casual hint, an incorrectly labeled few-shot example, or a fake prior assistant turn often flips an originally correct answer. We study where this susceptibility, spanning sycophancy and related cue-induced biases, lives inside the model.
arXiv:2606. 03165v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The language used by digital chat assistants such as ChatGPT can diverge from human expectations (misalignment).
By Thomas Stephan Juzek, Xiaoyang Ming, Jose A. Hernandez
arXiv:2607. 27824v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLMs encode, convey, and perpetuate stereotypes.
By Farane Jalali Farahani, Corina Dima, Mojtaba Nayyeri, Raphael H. Heiberger, Steffen Staab
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.