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.
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.
By Rapha\"el Sarfati, Pratyush Ranjan Tiwari, Siddharth Boppana, Christopher J. Earls, Srikar Varadaraj, Eric Ho
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.
By Jason Miklian
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. We ask whether internal representations offer a more direct window into both.
arXiv:2512. 15792v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have rapidly become indispensable tools for acquiring information and supporting human decision-making.
By Xulang Zhang, Rui Mao, Erik Cambria
arXiv:2607. 09262v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to summarize and evaluate policy-relevant information, but it remains unclear whether their judgments are implicitly shaped by geopolitical cues.
By Maxim Chupilkin