Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 cited by

A Comprehensive Survey of Bias in LLMs: Current Landscape and Future Directions

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 2409.16430 v1 pith:MPHLBBGP submitted 2024-09-24 cs.CL cs.AIcs.CYcs.HC

classification cs.CLcs.AIcs.CYcs.HC
keywords biasesllmssurveyapplicationsbiascomprehensivecurrentdirections
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large Language Models(LLMs) have revolutionized various applications in natural language processing (NLP) by providing unprecedented text generation, translation, and comprehension capabilities. However, their widespread deployment has brought to light significant concerns regarding biases embedded within these models. This paper presents a comprehensive survey of biases in LLMs, aiming to provide an extensive review of the types, sources, impacts, and mitigation strategies related to these biases. We systematically categorize biases into several dimensions. Our survey synthesizes current research findings and discusses the implications of biases in real-world applications. Additionally, we critically assess existing bias mitigation techniques and propose future research directions to enhance fairness and equity in LLMs. This survey serves as a foundational resource for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers concerned with addressing and understanding biases in LLMs.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

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

  1. Towards Efficient and Effective Alignment of Large Language Models

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A thesis presenting Lion, WebR, LTE, BMC, and FollowBench, five empirical methods that together address LLM alignment data, training, and evaluation.

  2. LLMs on Trial: Evaluating Judicial Fairness for Large Language Models

    cs.CL 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A new 177,100-case benchmark shows that 16 LLMs systematically vary criminal sentences based on extra-legal demographic and procedural details, revealing pervasive judicial unfairness.

  3. A Close Reading Approach to Gender Narrative Biases in AI-Generated Stories

    cs.HC 2025-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A close reading of 15 AI-generated stories finds that even when character counts are balanced, narrative roles, descriptions, and plot dynamics remain gender-stereotyped (e.g., every villain is male).

  4. Understanding How University Guidelines Address Privacy and Security Issues of Generative AI in Academic Settings

    cs.HC 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Qualitative analysis of 46 university GenAI policy documents shows privacy and security concerns are acknowledged but inconsistently addressed, with vague terminology, reliance on existing frameworks, and limited conc...

  5. Audit, Alignment, and Optimization of LM-Powered Subroutines with Application to Public Comment Processing

    cs.CL 2025-07 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A framework for auditable, type-checked LM subroutines with bandit prompt optimization and self-critique is applied to NEPA public comment processing; the baseline evaluation shows high quote precision but low recall.

Pith tools