# Societal Impacts Research Requires Benchmarks for Creative Composition Tasks

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.06549 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.06549/

## Key facts

- Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 73 of its 112 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 9 Apr 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 73)

- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.09288/) (2023)
- [GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Natural Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1804.07461/) (2018)
- [Beyond the Imitation Game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2206.04615/) (2022)
- [A Survey on Hallucination in Large Language Models: Principles, Taxonomy, Challenges, and Open Questions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.05232/) (2023)
- [Hierarchical Neural Story Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1805.04833/) (2018)
- [Chatbot Arena: An Open Platform for Evaluating LLMs by Human Preference](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.04132/) (2024)
- [Fantastically Ordered Prompts and Where to Find Them: Overcoming Few-Shot Prompt Order Sensitivity](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2104.08786/) (2021)
- [Large Language Models Are Human-Level Prompt Engineers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.01910/) (2022)
- [Towards Understanding Sycophancy in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.13548/) (2023)
- [Red Teaming Language Models with Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.03286/) (2022)
- [Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.05782/) (2023)
- [BBQ: A Hand-Built Bias Benchmark for Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.08193/) (2021)
- [LLM Evaluators Recognize and Favor Their Own Generations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.13076/) (2024)
- [WildChat: 1M ChatGPT Interaction Logs in the Wild](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.01470/) (2024)
- [DecodingTrust: A Comprehensive Assessment of Trustworthiness in GPT Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.11698/) (2023)
- [LMSYS-Chat-1M: A Large-Scale Real-World LLM Conversation Dataset](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.11998/) (2023)
- [Retiring Adult: New Datasets for Fair Machine Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.04884/) (2021)
- [AI safety via debate](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1805.00899/) (2018)
- [Can LLMs Generate Novel Research Ideas? A Large-Scale Human Study with 100+ NLP Researchers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.04109/) (2024)
- [Bias in Bios: A Case Study of Semantic Representation Bias in a High-Stakes Setting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1901.09451/) (2019)
- [AI and the Everything in the Whole Wide World Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2111.15366/) (2021)
- [TrustLLM: Trustworthiness in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.05561/) (2024)
- [TextGrad: Automatic "Differentiation" via Text](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.07496/) (2024)
- [Self-Preference Bias in LLM-as-a-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.21819/) (2024)
- [ResearchAgent: Iterative Research Idea Generation over Scientific Literature with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.07738/) (2024)
- [Marked Personas: Using Natural Language Prompts to Measure Stereotypes in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.18189/) (2023)
- ["Kelly is a Warm Person, Joseph is a Role Model": Gender Biases in LLM-Generated Reference Letters](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.09219/) (2023)
- [Does Writing with Language Models Reduce Content Diversity?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.05196/) (2023)

## Built on by (most cited first, 3 of 3)

- [How AI Impacts Skill Formation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.20245/) (2026)
- [GuessBench: Sensemaking Multimodal Creativity in the Wild](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.00814/) (2025)
- [When to Ask a Question: Understanding Communication Strategies in Generative AI Tools](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.11240/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Foundation models that are capable of automating cognitive tasks represent a pivotal technological shift, yet their societal implications remain unclear. These systems promise exciting advances, yet they also risk flooding our information ecosystem with formulaic, homogeneous, and potentially misleading synthetic content. Developing benchmarks grounded in real use cases where these risks are most significant is therefore critical. Through a thematic analysis using 2 million language model user prompts, we identify creative composition tasks as a prevalent usage category where users seek help with personal tasks that require everyday creativity. Our fine-grained analysis identifies mismatches between current benchmarks and usage patterns among these tasks. Crucially, we argue that the same use cases that currently lack thorough evaluations can lead to negative downstream impacts. This position paper argues that benchmarks focused on creative composition tasks is a necessary step towards understanding the societal harms of AI-generated content. We call for greater transparency in usage patterns to inform the development of new benchmarks that can effectively measure both the progress and the impacts of models with creative capabilities.