arXiv:2607. 20441v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Every information ecosystem produces beliefs that shape strategic decisions.
Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv Machine Learning.
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.
The paper investigates how a minority of biased agents in a multi‑agent system of large language models (LLMs) can amplify bias through textual interactions. Even a small percentage of persistently extreme agents causes significant opinion shifts among the non‑biased agents, with the effect occurring faster in the Llama 3.2 model than in a classical Friedkin‑Johnsen model. Semantic analysis shows that rhetorical consistency rises with biased exposure and that non‑biased agents adopt the biased vocabulary even when their numerical opinions change only modestly.
The study examines how language influences AI chatbot responses to questions about the war in Ukraine, revealing that the same AI systems (GPT, Claude, Gemini) produce varying political stances across 112 languages. By evaluating 20 statements in 112 languages, the researchers found that Russia‑leaning versus Ukraine‑leaning answers differ by language, mirroring global political attitudes such as public support for Russia, UN voting patterns, and aid levels. This pattern persists across all three models and even when specific statement pairs are removed, suggesting that information warfare could embed geopolitical biases into AI training data.
arXiv:2607. 08046v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models fine-tuned for forecasting can be accurate yet poorly calibrated, and their chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning may not faithfully reflect the evidence behind a forecast.
arXiv:2607. 14197v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Artificial Intelligence (AI) answer engines now field a growing share of the questions that analysts, scholars, and the public ask about issues of peace and conflict.
The paper demonstrates that large language models (LLMs) used for forecasting real‑world events can be manipulated by simply publishing new articles, even without direct access to the model or its retriever. By injecting a small number of targeted news pieces into a common crawl corpus, an adversary can flip over half of the forecast probabilities and significantly degrade forecast accuracy. The study also shows that common defense strategies can be cheaply bypassed, highlighting the vulnerability of probabilistic LLM judgments to information‑supply‑chain attacks.