Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Hey GPT, Can You be More Racist? Analysis from Crowdsourced Attempts to Elicit Biased Content from Generative AI

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 2410.15467 v1 pith:5UI27VRB submitted 2024-10-20 cs.CL cs.AIcs.HC

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

The widespread adoption of large language models (LLMs) and generative AI (GenAI) tools across diverse applications has amplified the importance of addressing societal biases inherent within these technologies. While the NLP community has extensively studied LLM bias, research investigating how non-expert users perceive and interact with biases from these systems remains limited. As these technologies become increasingly prevalent, understanding this question is crucial to inform model developers in their efforts to mitigate bias. To address this gap, this work presents the findings from a university-level competition, which challenged participants to design prompts for eliciting biased outputs from GenAI tools. We quantitatively and qualitatively analyze the competition submissions and identify a diverse set of biases in GenAI and strategies employed by participants to induce bias in GenAI. Our finding provides unique insights into how non-expert users perceive and interact with biases from GenAI tools.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. OpenAlex reports about 4 citations worldwide. Full citation record

  1. Can LLMs Rank the Harmfulness of Smaller LLMs? We are Not There Yet

    cs.CL 2025-02 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Large AI judges agree only weakly to moderately with human raters when ranking the harmfulness of smaller AI models' outputs, and the three small models differ in how often they produce harmful content.

Pith tools