Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

A Multifaceted Analysis of Social Biases in Large Language Models

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2512.15792 v4 pith:XUDQMHHV submitted 2025-12-16 cs.CY cs.AIcs.CL

A Multifaceted Analysis of Social Biases in Large Language Models

classification cs.CY cs.AIcs.CL
keywords biaseslanguagellmsmodelsacrossaffinitieslargenews
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large language models (LLMs) have rapidly become indispensable tools for acquiring information and supporting human decision-making. However, ensuring that these models uphold fairness across varied contexts is critical to their safe and responsible deployment. In this study, we undertake a comprehensive examination of four widely adopted LLMs, probing their underlying biases and inclinations across the dimensions of politics, ideology, alliance, language, and gender. Through a series of carefully designed experiments, we investigate their political neutrality using news summarization, ideological biases through news stance classification, tendencies toward specific geopolitical alliances via United Nations voting patterns, language bias in the context of multilingual story completion, and gender-related affinities as revealed by responses to the World Values Survey. Results indicate that while the LLMs are aligned to be neutral and impartial, they still show biases and affinities of different types.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Synthetic Sources?: Auditing Generative Search Engine Citations for Evidence of AI-Generated Sources

    cs.IR 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Audit of ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini and Perplexity finds ~16% of cited sources are AI-generated across 712 queries on politics, health and environment.