Hugging Face Trending Papers

Group Alignment-Induced Sycophancy: A Two-Sided Evaluation of Steerable Pluralistic Alignment

Group alignment adapts a language model to a demographic group to produce responses that reflect the group's opinions, values, and preferences. Sycophancy, a well-documented by-product of alignment, causes the model to over-agree with the user regardless of factual and objective information.

arXiv Machine Learning
Jul 24

How Robust Is Homogeneity Bias in LLMs? Evidence Across Models, Decoding Settings, and Identity Signals

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
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jul 8

Dissociating the Internal Representations of Sycophancy in LLMs

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 AI
Jul 21

How Does Alignment Tuning Shape Representations of Sycophancy and Related Cue-Induced Biases in LLMs?

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
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jul 20

How Does Alignment Tuning Shape Representations of Sycophancy and Related Cue-Induced Biases in LLMs?

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.