mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

What Do Llamas Really Think? Revealing Preference Biases in Language Model Representations

arXiv 2311.18812 ↗First posted 30 Nov 2023cs.CLcited by 10

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation

Abstract (arXiv)

Do large language models (LLMs) exhibit sociodemographic biases, even when they decline to respond? To bypass their refusal to "speak," we study this research question by probing contextualized embeddings and exploring whether this bias is encoded in its latent representations. We propose a logistic Bradley-Terry probe which predicts word pair preferences of LLMs from the words' hidden vectors. We first validate our probe on three pair preference tasks and thirteen LLMs, where we outperform the word embedding association test (WEAT), a standard approach in testing for implicit association, by a relative 27% in error rate. We also find that word pair preferences are best represented in the middle layers. Next, we transfer probes trained on harmless tasks (e.g., pick the larger number) to controversial ones (compare ethnicities) to examine biases in nationality, politics, religion, and gender. We observe substantial bias for all target classes: for instance, the Mistral model implicitly prefers Europe to Africa, Christianity to Judaism, and left-wing to right-wing politics, despite declining to answer. This suggests that instruction fine-tuning does not necessarily debias contextualized embeddings. Our codebase is at https://github.com/castorini/biasprobe.

Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 24 of its 41 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Nov 2023.

Builds on

24 of 41 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2023Code Llama: Open Foundation Models for Code24 Aug

Other references · 23

  1. 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
  2. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,399
  3. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
  4. 2019Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformercited by 14,599
  5. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,372
  6. 2020The Pile: An 800GB Dataset of Diverse Text for Language Modelingcited by 2,411
  7. 2016Semantics derived automatically from language corpora contain human-like biasescited by 901
  8. 2021Probing Classifiers: Promises, Shortcomings, and Advancescited by 876
  9. 2019Designing and Interpreting Probes with Control Taskscited by 640
  10. 2019On Measuring Social Biases in Sentence Encoderscited by 398
  11. 2019Is Attention Interpretable?cited by 389
  12. 2023Is ChatGPT Good at Search? Investigating Large Language Models as Re-Ranking Agentscited by 360
11 more
  1. 2019Lipstick on a Pig: Debiasing Methods Cover up Systematic Gender Biases in Word Embeddings But do not Remove Themcited by 268
  2. 2023From Pretraining Data to Language Models to Downstream Tasks: Tracking the Trails of Political Biases Leading to Unfair NLP Modelscited by 260
  3. 2021Societal Biases in Language Generation: Progress and Challengescited by 202
  4. 2019Assessing Social and Intersectional Biases in Contextualized Word Representationscited by 135
  5. 2019AllenNLP Interpret: A Framework for Explaining Predictions of NLP Modelscited by 74
  6. 2022Problems with Cosine as a Measure of Embedding Similarity for High Frequency Wordscited by 49
  7. 2023Probing Explicit and Implicit Gender Bias through LLM Conditional Text Generationcited by 31
  8. 2020Raiders of the Lost Kek: 3.5 Years of Augmented 4chan Posts from the Politically Incorrect Boardcited by 24
  9. 2016Kek, Cucks, and God Emperor Trump: A Measurement Study of 4chan's Politically Incorrect Forum and Its Effects on the Webcited by 15
  10. 2021Assessing the Reliability of Word Embedding Gender Bias Measurescited by 14
  11. 2023Unsupervised Contrast-Consistent Ranking with Language Modelscited by 13

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 5; 2025: 3; 2026: 2.

10 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2024Interpreting Bias in Large Language Models: A Feature-Based Approach
  2. 2025Dissecting Bias in LLMs: A Mechanistic Interpretability Perspective
  3. 2026CogBias: Measuring and Mitigating Cognitive Bias in Large Language Models
  4. 2025Examining Alignment of Large Language Models through Representative Heuristics: The Case of Political Stereotypes
  5. 2025Bias Testing and Mitigation in Black Box LLMs using Metamorphic Relations
  6. 2026Tracing Stereotypes from Representation to Output in Multilingual LLMs
  7. 2025Flattery, Fluff, and Fog: Diagnosing and Mitigating Idiosyncratic Biases in Preference Models
  8. 2025Explicit vs. Implicit: Investigating Social Bias in Large Language Models through Self-Reflection