arXiv:2603. 23841v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: While Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used as primary sources of information, their potential for political bias may impact their objectivity.
By Rohan Khetan, Ashna Khetan
arXiv:2508. 03250v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: The increasing amount of political debates and politics-related discussions calls for the definition of novel computational methods to automatically analyse such content with the final goal of lightening up political deliberation to citizens.
By Deborah Dore, Elena Cabrio, Serena Villata
arXiv:2604. 00878v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Actor-level stance detection aims to determine an author expressed position toward specific geopolitical actors mentioned or implicated in a text.
By Abdullah Al Shafi, Md. Milon Islam, Sk. Imran Hossain, K. M. Azharul Hasan
The paper introduces a retrieval‑augmented framework for detecting and classifying fallacies in political debate transcripts. By dynamically retrieving documents guided by argumentative relations of support and attack, the method leverages external knowledge to improve performance. Experiments on the ElecDeb60to20 benchmark show significant gains, raising macro‑F1 to 0.864 for detection and 0.725 for classification compared to non‑retrieval baselines.
By Deborah Dore, Greta Damo, Elena Cabrio, Serena Villata
arXiv:2608. 14629v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: As Large Language Models (LLMs) become the mainstay for information retrieval and summarization tasks, ensuring that they are always non-partisan and invulnerable to political bias is a critical step towards safer and more trustworthy Artificial Intelligence (AI).
By Tejaswi V. Panchagnula, Bruce Coburn, Bryce J. Dietrich, Robert X. Browning, Edward J. Delp, Fengqing Zhu
arXiv:2608.29198v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: As Large Language Models (LLMs) increasingly encourage users to disclose personal profiles for tailored assistance, measuring their political alignment...
By Li-Ni Fu, Chang-Chih Meng, Chien-Hua Chen, Hen-Hsen Huang, I-Chen Wu
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
PolERo presents a new dataset of 3,574 Romanian question‑answer pairs from presidential transcripts, annotated for political evasion using a two‑level taxonomy of response clarity and fine‑grained evasion strategies. The study evaluates various classification methods—including TF‑IDF baselines, fine‑tuned encoders, a sliding‑window encoder, and zero/few‑shot LLM prompting—under matched conditions. Cross‑lingual transfer experiments via joint bilingual training and machine‑translation augmentation reveal that fine‑tuned encoders perform competitively, transfer is asymmetric, and ambivalent evasion categories with pragmatic cues remain the most challenging across all models.
By Gabriel Stefan, Sergiu Nisioi
MMDS-Bench is a new diagnostic benchmark for multimodal dynamic stance classification in social media parent‑reply interactions. It contains 3,482 multimodal instances annotated with a seven‑label stance taxonomy, plus an 800‑instance subset that demands structured reasoning over parent and reply understanding and stance‑relation inference. The benchmark also tags each instance with five challenge factors—multimodal fusion, parent framing, non‑literal expression, interaction reasoning, and label‑boundary ambiguity—and evaluates 12 multimodal large language models using a reference‑grounded LLM‑judge protocol, revealing that current models still struggle with relational inference beyond separate parent and reply comprehension.
By Yuzhe Ding, Kang He, Li Zheng, Shengwu Zheng, Teng Shi, Fei Li, Chong Teng, Donghong Ji
The paper investigates how dense embedding models can be used for stance-aware argument retrieval, a task that requires both topic relevance and correct stance (support or attack) toward a claim. Experiments reveal that current models favor topical overlap and ignore stance, and that contrastive training to fix this bias leads to over-correction, where models focus too much on polarity keywords at the expense of topic relevance. To address this, the authors propose diagnostic word-ablation metrics and a data‑centric solution involving a balanced argument curriculum and LLM‑augmented stance‑inverted arguments, which helps powerful models learn deeper directional logic and improves stance‑aware retrieval performance.
By Angelo Sparacino, Francesca Toni, Adam Dejl
arXiv:2607. 28638v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: As large language model (LLM) agents increasingly learn from experience, they primarily rely on trajectory-level reflection to extract insights.
By Yan Song, Xidong Feng, Bo Liu, Xinyu Cui, Haotian Fu, Zichen Liu, Mengyue Yang, Cheng Deng, Jian Zhao, Jun Wang
arXiv:2607. 15095v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The formation of political coalitions is a complex negotiation driven by both concrete policy objectives and deep-seated ideological convictions.
By Dylan Van Mulders, Matthias Bogaert, Dirk Van den Poel