REVIEW 1 cited by
Who Gets Recommended? Investigating Gender, Race, and Country Disparities in Paper Recommendations 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
read the original abstract
This paper investigates the performance of several representative large models in the tasks of literature recommendation and explores potential biases in research exposure. The results indicate that not only LLMs' overall recommendation accuracy remains limited but also the models tend to recommend literature with greater citation counts, later publication date, and larger author teams. Yet, in scholar recommendation tasks, there is no evidence that LLMs disproportionately recommend male, white, or developed-country authors, contrasting with patterns of known human biases.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Whose Name Comes Up? Auditing LLM-Based Scholar Recommendations
An audit of six open-weight LLMs shows that AI-generated scholar recommendations favor senior, highly cited, White and male scientists and often fail multi-constraint queries.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.