The study investigates how Google’s Gemma 4‑e4b language model resolves conflicts between two documents. Using a counterbalanced design, researchers found that the semantic framing of a source (e.g., labeling it as an official guideline) dominates over the order in which documents appear. While the model shows a primacy bias toward the first document, this bias varies widely with wording and is amplified only when the documents are structurally identical.
By Amanda Fitch
arXiv:2608. 12339v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language models (LLMs) were found to be susceptible to a host of social, affective, and cognitive biases.
By Eldad Yechiam, Adi Tarabeih
arXiv:2601. 04098v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Transformer language models systematically prefer tokens at specific input positions regardless of semantic relevance---a phenomenon known as positional bias.
By Maryam Rahimi, Mahdi Nouri, Yadollah Yaghoobzadeh
arXiv:2608.29803v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as proxies for human participants in social simulations, yet whether they update their beliefs...
By Lin Chen, Yitong Chen, Yong Li
arXiv:2608. 14681v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Words recur constantly in natural language use, yet it remains unclear whether language models reactivate prior representations or re-evaluate repeated words afresh, and whether post-training changes this default behavior.
By Jinglei Ren, Yuyue Wang
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
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:2605. 26795v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting enhances large language model performance, yet what drives these gains remains unclear.
By Xiang Wang, Wei Wei
arXiv:2608. 14320v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The anchoring effect is a cognitive bias in which an initial reference value shifts a later judgment toward itself.
By Yiderigun Borjigin, Alexander Hermann, Christian Cyron, Roland Aydin
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to assess social bias in text, but the passages they evaluate often contain surface noise such as typos and broken punctuation. This study applied five realistic noise conditions at varying intensities to 3,822 stereotype‑related responses and compared bias judgments on noisy versus original text. The findings show that noise disproportionately turns neutral judgments into biased ones—up to 120 times more likely—while rarely converting biased judgments into neutral ones, and that the most fragile LLM judge exhibits the greatest distortion at mild noise levels. As LLMs become more robust, the bias distortion tends toward parity rather than reversal, meaning bias measured on noisy text is systematically overestimated, especially in fairness‑critical categories.
By DongHyun Ryu, Jaehyeok Lee, YeongJun Hwang, JinYeong Bak
arXiv:2502.10577v2 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: Instruct-based large language models (LLMs) have been shown to propagate and even amplify gender bias when prompted with contextually constra...
By Enzo Doyen, Amalia Todirascu
The paper examines how large language models (LLMs) respond to different demographic cues—such as names—when users seek advice, focusing on race and gender in a U.S. context. It finds that using different cues for the same group leads to only partially overlapping changes in model responses, producing inconsistent conclusions about personalization and unstable bias metrics. The authors argue that LLMs react to linguistic signals tied to cues rather than to stable demographic categories, and they call for evaluations that use multiple cues and consider underlying mechanisms.
By Manuel Tonneau, Neil K. R. Sehgal, Niyati Malhotra, Sharif Kazemi, Victor Orozco-Olvera, Ana Mar\'ia Mu\~noz Boudet, Lakshmi Subramanian, Samuel P. Fraiberger, Sharath Chandra Guntuku, Valentin Hofmann