Evaluating Language Model Bias with ๐ค Evaluate
Related stories
Very Large Language Models and How to Evaluate Them
Challenges and Recommendations for LLMs-as-a-Judge in Multilingual Settings and Low-Resource Languages
arXiv:2607. 02235v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLM-as-a-Judge has become the dominant evaluation paradigm for many natural language generation tasks, due to shortcomings of conventional metrics and high correlations with human judgment, albeit mostly in English.
Multilingual Prompt Localization for Agent-as-a-Judge: Language and Backbone Sensitivity in Requirement-Level Evaluation
arXiv:2604. 04532v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Evaluation language is typically treated as a fixed English default in agentic code benchmarks, yet we show that changing the judge's language can invert backbone rankings.
OptimismBench: Forecasting Bias and the Alignment Effect in Language Model Judgment
Large language models are increasingly used as decision aids whose probability judgments shape downstream choices. Whether those judgments carry a systematic directional tilt has been hard to detect: calibration metrics aggregate unsigned errors, and naturalistic uncertainty offers no ground-truth probability.
Failure of contextual invariance in large language models
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.
RPAM: A Principled Metric for Evaluating Associations in Language Models with High Predictive Validity in Downstream Outputs
arXiv:2607. 05679v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Language models (LMs) exhibit problematic biases, such as stereotypes.
DeFrame: Debiasing Large Language Models Against Framing Effects
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.
M-GATE: Multilingual Grammar, Accuracy in Translation, and Efficiency Benchmark for Large Language Models
arXiv:2608. 03803v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multilingual language models are deployed across a hundred or more languages, yet most benchmarks test whether a model can perform a task _in_ a language rather than whether it commands the language itself, conflating fluency with proficiency.
Mitigating Scoring Bias in LLM-as-a-Judge via Random Number Generation
arXiv:2608. 05726v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are often used as evaluators of text quality, known as LLM-as-a-Judge, which can outperform conventional automatic evaluation metrics that rely on reference texts.
IndoBias: A Dual Track Culturally Grounded Benchmark for LLMs Bias Evaluation in Indonesian Languages
arXiv:2606. 01260v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Despite being home to more than 1300 ethnic groups and 700 indigenous languages, bias in Large Language Models has not been fully studied in Indonesia, thus leaving a critical gap in evaluating representational fairness and localized stereotypes within its uniquely vast, multilingual, and diverse sociocultural landscape.
Language Equality has a Price: A Systematic Investigation of Multi-turn LLM Performance for EU-24+
We evaluate large language models (LLMs) as language agents playing goal-directed dialogue games in self-play across 30 languages: the 24 official EU languages plus six others. Unlike static or preference-based evaluation, this paradigm is multi-turn, reference-free and programmatically scored, and because the game mechanics are language-agnostic it extends to a new language by localising a fixed set of prompt and word-list files.