arXiv:2607. 28934v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly involved in the distribution of scarce resources, raising concerns about biased allocations based on characteristics like race and gender.
By Martin Lukk (University of Toronto)
The study evaluates ten bias audit instruments across ten advanced language models on occupational gender, age, and socioeconomic status. While each tool reliably detects bias, their rankings of model performance are essentially random, indicating that different audits measure distinct constructs. The findings show that a single audit can identify bias direction within its own framework, but no audit can consistently rank models against one another.
By William Guey, Pierrick Bougault, Wei Zhang, Vitor D. de Moura, Jos\'e O. Gomes
The paper examines whether removing declared language fields from de‑identified résumés eliminates demographic leakage in large language models. By keeping language attributes identical and varying only unstructured prose across five ethnocultural groups and three cue‑salience levels, the authors find that non‑language text still allows target‑group recovery (average 0.757, reaching 1.000 under high salience). They also show that evaluation design—such as allowing or forbidding ties—dramatically affects LLM‑as‑a‑judge outcomes, underscoring the importance of evaluation protocol in bias audits.
By Qiangju Chen, Yang Xiao
arXiv:2506. 23033v5 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Fairness audits are a key component of responsible machine-learning deployment.
By Yash Vardhan Tomar
PopResume is a population‑representative resume dataset designed for causal fairness auditing of large language model (LLM) and vision‑language model (VLM) resume screeners. It grounds fairness evaluation in real population statistics and preserves natural attribute relationships, enabling path‑specific effect (PSE) analysis that separates business‑necessity from redlining pathways. Using PopResume, the authors evaluated eight models on 60.8K resumes across five occupations and uncovered five discrimination patterns that aggregate metrics missed, demonstrating the value of causally‑grounded auditing.
By Sumin Yu, Juhyeon Park, Taesup Moon
arXiv:2606. 16723v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly take actions (screening applicants, recommending credit, triaging patients), yet fairness for LLMs is still measured by grading answers.
By Triveni Morla, Rohith Reddy Bellibaltu, Manpreet Singh, Manmeet Singh Kapoor
arXiv:2608. 14399v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Patients increasingly ask large language model (LLM) assistants which doctor to see, making these systems AI infomediaries: algorithms that intermediate one person's choice among other people and thereby decide, silently and at scale, which physicians become visible.
By Syeda Anshrah Gillani, Mirza Samad Ahmed Baig
Large language models (LLMs) are entering decisions in triage and lending, where task-relevant inference must be distinguished from impermissible proxy use. Current audits ask whether decisions change...
The paper audits vision‑language models (CLIP) for gender bias using 1,500 artworks from the Metropolitan Museum of Art, focusing on zero‑shot logit differences for prompts like "masterpiece," "quality," and "influence." Unadjusted results show no significant gender effect and statistical equivalence across models, but high residual variance suggests that global zero‑shot metrics are largely noise‑dominated and may miss fine‑grained biases. The study underscores the need for multivariate confound control, equivalence testing, and provenance auditing when evaluating AI fairness in cultural heritage data.
By Manpreet Singh, Rhythm Bhatia, Rahul Joshi
arXiv:2608.22887v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are entering decisions in triage and lending, where task-relevant inference must be distinguished from impermissible proxy...
By Zengqing Wu, Chuan Xiao
arXiv:2604.19984v2 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: Research has documented LLMs' name-based bias in hiring and salary recommendations. In this paper, we instead consider a setting where LLMs g...
By Huy Nghiem, Phuong-Anh Nguyen-Le, Sy-Tuyen Ho, Hal Daume III
The paper proposes a scalable, automated method for auditing candidate‑job matching systems for demographic bias. It employs large‑language‑model agents to generate neutral resumes, injects controlled demographic variations, ranks candidates with a fine‑tuned embedding model, and evaluates nine fairness metrics across counterfactual, group‑fairness, and merit‑aware families, producing a composite risk report. Experiments on a small corpus show that single‑score audits miss nuanced issues, underscoring the need for multi‑metric evaluation and LLM‑generated audits as a low‑cost complement to human reviews.
By Sai Yashwant, Shruti Bansal, Anurag Dubey, Samaroha Chatterjee, Satyam Kumar, Shreyash Gupta, Gantala Thulsiram