arXiv:2509. 16462v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used in high-stakes decision-making systems, where biased predictions can reinforce social and economic disparities.
By Mina Arzaghi, Alireza Dehghanpour Farashah, Florian Carichon, Jean-Fran\c{c}ois Plante, Golnoosh Farnadi
arXiv:2601. 21864v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) exhibit social biases that reinforce harmful stereotypes, limiting their safe deployment.
By Jinhao Pan, Chahat Raj, Anjishnu Mukherjee, Sina Mansouri, Bowen Wei, Shloka Yada, Ziwei Zhu
BiasGym is a cost‑effective, generalizable framework that injects specific biases into large language models via token‑based fine‑tuning while keeping the model frozen. It then uses two debiasing methods—Scope and Steer—to identify and suppress or redirect the components responsible for biased behavior. The framework enables consistent bias elicitation, precise localization of bias associations, and targeted debiasing without harming downstream performance, and it has been shown to reduce real‑world stereotypes such as labeling Italians as reckless drivers.
By Sekh Mainul Islam, Nadav Borenstein, Siddhesh Milind Pawar, Haeun Yu, Arnav Arora, Isabelle Augenstein
arXiv:2602. 04306v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in real-world applications, ensuring their fair responses across demographics has become crucial.
By Kahee Lim, Soyeon Kim, Steven Euijong Whang
arXiv:2604.20677v3 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in socially sensitive settings, raising concerns about fairness and bias, particularly when...
By Chaima Boufaied, Ronnie De Souza Santos, Ann Barcomb
arXiv:2610.08559v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Activation steering has gained popularity as a lightweight inference-time debiasing technique for large language models. However, prior work reports...
By Stephanie Buttigieg, Maeve Madigan, Parameswaran Kamalaruban, Stuart Burrell
arXiv:2609.40124v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Bias has long been studied in social psychology and cognitive science, where decades of research have produced a body of validated interventions that r...
By Chahat Raj, Sina Mansouri, Aylin Caliskan, Antonios Anastasopoulos, Ziwei Zhu
The paper "Fair Like Us? Auditing LLM Alignment in Resource Allocation" presents a method for evaluating how large language models reason about fairness in the allocation of scarce, indivisible resources. It compares LLMs’ first‑person fairness judgments with human responses across various scenarios, finding that models tend to favor stricter fairness constraints, exhibit more self‑interested behavior, and are sensitive to framing. The study also shows that current fine‑tuning datasets struggle to align LLM judgments with human ones.
By Qishen Han, Hadi Hosseini, Joshua Kavner, Samarth Khanna, Sujoy Sikdar, Lirong Xia
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.
By Jiaxu Zhao, Meng Fang, Shirui Pan, Wenpeng Yin, Mykola Pechenizkiy
arXiv:2511. 06148v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: As large language models (LLMs) are adopted into frameworks that grant them the capacity to make real decisions, it is increasingly important to ensure that they are unbiased.
By Addison J. Wu, Ryan Liu, Xuechunzi Bai, Thomas L. Griffiths
The paper introduces a novel framework for assessing second‑order bias in large language models (LLMs), defined as bias in how an LLM judges the acceptability of biased content. Using principles from entitlement epistemology, the authors design a reasoning task that asks LLMs to determine whether a biased text is acceptable for specific demographic groups, and propose two metrics to quantify biased judgments. Experiments on both open‑source and closed‑source models reveal that the task bypasses safety guardrails, uncovers systematic variations across target groups, and demonstrates that models still rely on demographic labels when evaluating bias.
By Ramaravind Kommiya Mothilal, Terry Jingchen Zhang, Raiyan Ahmed, Zhijing Jin, Shion Guha, Syed Ishtiaque Ahmed
arXiv:2608. 19670v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) compression reduces deployment costs, but standard aggregate metrics like perplexity and accuracy often mask underlying behavioral shifts.
By Yuan Wu, Mairui Li, Lesia Semenova, Chudi Zhong