Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

CulturalTeaming: AI-Assisted Interactive Red-Teaming for Challenging LLMs' (Lack of) Multicultural Knowledge

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 2404.06664 v1 pith:2L4C4TAI submitted 2024-04-10 cs.CL cs.AIcs.HC

CulturalTeaming: AI-Assisted Interactive Red-Teaming for Challenging LLMs' (Lack of) Multicultural Knowledge

classification cs.CL cs.AIcs.HC
keywords llmsmulticulturalculturalknowledgeannotatorsassistanceculturalteamingdataset
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Frontier large language models (LLMs) are developed by researchers and practitioners with skewed cultural backgrounds and on datasets with skewed sources. However, LLMs' (lack of) multicultural knowledge cannot be effectively assessed with current methods for developing benchmarks. Existing multicultural evaluations primarily rely on expensive and restricted human annotations or potentially outdated internet resources. Thus, they struggle to capture the intricacy, dynamics, and diversity of cultural norms. LLM-generated benchmarks are promising, yet risk propagating the same biases they are meant to measure. To synergize the creativity and expert cultural knowledge of human annotators and the scalability and standardizability of LLM-based automation, we introduce CulturalTeaming, an interactive red-teaming system that leverages human-AI collaboration to build truly challenging evaluation dataset for assessing the multicultural knowledge of LLMs, while improving annotators' capabilities and experiences. Our study reveals that CulturalTeaming's various modes of AI assistance support annotators in creating cultural questions, that modern LLMs fail at, in a gamified manner. Importantly, the increased level of AI assistance (e.g., LLM-generated revision hints) empowers users to create more difficult questions with enhanced perceived creativity of themselves, shedding light on the promises of involving heavier AI assistance in modern evaluation dataset creation procedures. Through a series of 1-hour workshop sessions, we gather CULTURALBENCH-V0.1, a compact yet high-quality evaluation dataset with users' red-teaming attempts, that different families of modern LLMs perform with accuracy ranging from 37.7% to 72.2%, revealing a notable gap in LLMs' multicultural proficiency.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Camellia: Benchmarking Cultural Biases in LLMs for Asian Languages

    cs.CL 2025-10 conditional novelty 6.0

    Across nine Asian languages, multilingual LLMs favor Western cultural entities in 30-40% of culturally grounded contexts, with model-specific sentiment biases and extraction accuracy gaps.

  2. CultureSynth: A Hierarchical Taxonomy-Guided and Retrieval-Augmented Framework for Cultural Question-Answer Synthesis

    cs.CL 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0

    A taxonomy-guided retrieval-augmented framework generates CultureSynth-7, a multilingual cultural QA benchmark, and its evaluation of 14 LLMs suggests cultural competence emerges around 3B parameters.