mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Assessing Gender Bias in LLMs: Comparing LLM Outputs with Human Perceptions and Official Statistics

arXiv 2411.13738 ↗First posted 20 Nov 2024cs.CL cs.LGcited by 4

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

This study investigates gender bias in large language models (LLMs) by comparing their gender perception to that of human respondents, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data, and a 50% no-bias benchmark. We created a new evaluation set using occupational data and role-specific sentences. Unlike common benchmarks included in LLM training data, our set is newly developed, preventing data leakage and test set contamination. Five LLMs were tested to predict the gender for each role using single-word answers. We used Kullback-Leibler (KL) divergence to compare model outputs with human perceptions, statistical data, and the 50% neutrality benchmark. All LLMs showed significant deviation from gender neutrality and aligned more with statistical data, still reflecting inherent biases.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 5 of its 11 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Nov 2024.

Builds on

5 of 11 references.

References · 5

  1. 2020Scaling Laws for Neural Language Modelscited by 6,586
  2. 2021On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Modelscited by 4,033
  3. 2016Man is to Computer Programmer as Woman is to Homemaker? Debiasing Word Embeddingscited by 1,312
  4. 2016Semantics derived automatically from language corpora contain human-like biasescited by 901
  5. 2019The Woman Worked as a Babysitter: On Biases in Language Generationcited by 541

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2025: 4.

4 papers.