Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Revealing Hidden Bias in AI: Lessons from 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 2410.16927 v1 pith:IFBWYHJO submitted 2024-10-22 cs.AI cs.CY

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

As large language models (LLMs) become integral to recruitment processes, concerns about AI-induced bias have intensified. This study examines biases in candidate interview reports generated by Claude 3.5 Sonnet, GPT-4o, Gemini 1.5, and Llama 3.1 405B, focusing on characteristics such as gender, race, and age. We evaluate the effectiveness of LLM-based anonymization in reducing these biases. Findings indicate that while anonymization reduces certain biases, particularly gender bias, the degree of effectiveness varies across models and bias types. Notably, Llama 3.1 405B exhibited the lowest overall bias. Moreover, our methodology of comparing anonymized and non-anonymized data reveals a novel approach to assessing inherent biases in LLMs beyond recruitment applications. This study underscores the importance of careful LLM selection and suggests best practices for minimizing bias in AI applications, promoting fairness and inclusivity.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. (Fact) Check Your Bias

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Biased prompts change the evidence an LLM fact-checker retrieves but barely change its verdicts, while safety refusals create an asymmetric negative bias in evidence collection.

  2. The Impact of Disability Disclosure on Fairness and Bias in LLM-Driven Candidate Selection

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    LLMs selecting among identical job candidates consistently favored those who disclosed no disability, penalizing both disability disclosure and refusal to answer.

Pith tools