Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Assessing Dialect Fairness and Robustness of Large Language Models in Reasoning Tasks

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 2410.11005 v3 pith:VD6Y2IRD submitted 2024-10-14 cs.CL cs.LG

classification cs.CLcs.LG
keywords reasoningaaveincludingllmsdialectlanguagemodelsqueries
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Language is not monolithic. While benchmarks, including those designed for multiple languages, are often used as proxies to evaluate the performance of Large Language Models (LLMs), they tend to overlook the nuances of within-language variation and thus fail to model the experience of speakers of non-standard dialects. Focusing on African American Vernacular English (AAVE), we present the first study aimed at objectively assessing the fairness and robustness of LLMs in handling dialects across canonical reasoning tasks, including algorithm, math, logic, and integrated reasoning. We introduce ReDial (Reasoning with Dialect Queries), a benchmark containing 1.2K+ parallel query pairs in Standardized English and AAVE. We hire AAVE speakers, including experts with computer science backgrounds, to rewrite seven popular benchmarks, such as HumanEval and GSM8K. With ReDial, we evaluate widely used LLMs, including GPT, Claude, Llama, Mistral, and the Phi model families. Our findings reveal that almost all of these widely used models show significant brittleness and unfairness to queries in AAVE. Our work establishes a systematic and objective framework for analyzing LLM bias in dialectal queries. Moreover, it highlights how mainstream LLMs provide unfair service to dialect speakers in reasoning tasks, laying a critical foundation for future research.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Aligned but Blind: Alignment Increases Implicit Bias by Reducing Awareness of Race

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Alignment on Llama 3 reduces explicit bias but amplifies implicit bias, because aligned models no longer represent 'black' and 'white' as racial concepts in ambiguous contexts.

  2. Can Large Language Models Generalize Procedures Across Representations?

    cs.CL 2026-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Post-training on graph or code versions of a planning task does not transfer to natural-language versions, but a symbolic-then-natural-language RL curriculum achieves strong transfer.

  3. The OCR Quest for Generalization: Learning to recognize low-resource alphabets with model editing

    cs.LG 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Merging task vectors from separately fine-tuned OCR experts improves out-of-domain generalization and transfer to low-resource alphabets compared to centralized fine-tuning on the same data.

Pith tools