CuBEs introduces culturally‑situated behavioral evaluations for large language models, adding cultural context to test scenarios and assessments. The authors built a human‑labeled dataset covering 12 cultures, revealing significant cross‑cultural differences that one‑size‑fits‑all judgments miss. Evaluating 13 LLMs shows that culturally situated tests uncover varied behaviors, such as Western political bias versus non‑Western religious or colonial biases, which standard evaluations overlook.
By Hoda Ayad, Tanu Mitra, Abhishek Mukherji
The paper introduces CAPRI, a dataset of conversations designed to test whether large language models (LLMs) can adapt their responses to users’ cultural backgrounds. Experiments show that while LLMs can infer a user’s cultural context and recall relevant conventions, they frequently fail to apply this knowledge when generating answers unless explicitly prompted to do so. The study also finds that LLMs’ cultural adaptations improve as more cues are provided, yet their default priors are not culture‑neutral and sometimes reflect the model’s country of origin.
By Yisong Miao, Jian Zhu, Vered Shwartz
arXiv:2609.10253v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in globally used assistants, yet their default choices in culturally grounded everyday situation...
By Bhuvan Arora, Devesh Saraogi, Sravya Varada, Dhruv Kumar
arXiv:2606. 12443v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Social roles shape expectations, priorities, and judgments, yet it remains unclear how large language models (LLMs) associate occupational identities with broader cultural value patterns.
By Maksim E. Eren, Andrea Brennen, Ryan C. Barron, Eric Michalak
arXiv:2607. 24782v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM behavior may be conditioned by human identity in several ways: they may be asked to adapt to users, role-play populations, or forecast how people would answer value-laden questions.
By James Wedgwood, Pratiksha Thaker, Neil Kale, Virginia Smith
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