# Relative Bias: A Comparative Framework for Quantifying Bias in LLMs

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.17131 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.17131/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 48 of its 81 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 22 May 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 48)

- [BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.04805/) (2018)
- [Language Models are Few-Shot Learners](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2005.14165/) (2020)
- [Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networks](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1908.10084/) (2019)
- [Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arena](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.05685/) (2023)
- [Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.03300/) (2020)
- [Self-Instruct: Aligning Language Models with Self-Generated Instructions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.10560/) (2022)
- [MMLU-Pro: A More Robust and Challenging Multi-Task Language Understanding Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.01574/) (2024)
- [A Survey on LLM-as-a-Judge](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.15594/) (2024)
- [RealToxicityPrompts: Evaluating Neural Toxic Degeneration in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.11462/) (2020)
- [Large Language Models are not Fair Evaluators](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.17926/) (2023)
- [Large Language Models Are Human-Level Prompt Engineers](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2211.01910/) (2022)
- [Toy Models of Superposition](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.10652/) (2022)
- [AlpacaFarm: A Simulation Framework for Methods that Learn from Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14387/) (2023)
- [CrowS-Pairs: A Challenge Dataset for Measuring Social Biases in Masked Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.00133/) (2020)
- [Bias and Fairness in Large Language Models: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.00770/) (2023)
- [Sentence-T5: Scalable Sentence Encoders from Pre-trained Text-to-Text Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2108.08877/) (2021)
- [BOLD: Dataset and Metrics for Measuring Biases in Open-Ended Language Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2101.11718/) (2021)
- [NeMo Guardrails: A Toolkit for Controllable and Safe LLM Applications with Programmable Rails](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.10501/) (2023)
- [Self-Diagnosis and Self-Debiasing: A Proposal for Reducing Corpus-Based Bias in NLP](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.00453/) (2021)
- [One Embedder, Any Task: Instruction-Finetuned Text Embeddings](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.09741/) (2022)
- [Explainability for Large Language Models: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.01029/) (2023)
- [Towards Understanding and Mitigating Social Biases in Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2106.13219/) (2021)
- [Measuring Bias in Contextualized Word Representations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.07337/) (2019)
- [Prompting GPT-3 To Be Reliable](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2210.09150/) (2022)
- [Pretraining Language Models with Human Preferences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.08582/) (2023)
- [OR-Bench: An Over-Refusal Benchmark for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.20947/) (2024)
- [Large Language Model Alignment: A Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.15025/) (2023)
- [Large Language Model as Attributed Training Data Generator: A Tale of Diversity and Bias](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2306.15895/) (2023)
- [Measuring and Reducing Gendered Correlations in Pre-trained Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2010.06032/) (2020)
- [Towards Debiasing Sentence Representations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2007.08100/) (2020)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [Query-Document Dense Vectors for LLM Relevance Judgment Bias Analysis](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.01751/) (2026)
- [IndoBias: A Dual Track Culturally Grounded Benchmark for LLMs Bias Evaluation in Indonesian Languages](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.01260/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

The growing deployment of large language models (LLMs) has amplified concerns regarding their inherent biases, raising critical questions about their fairness, safety, and societal impact. However, quantifying LLM bias remains a fundamental challenge, complicated by the ambiguity of what "bias" entails. This challenge grows as new models emerge rapidly and gain widespread use, while introducing potential biases that have not been systematically assessed. In this paper, we propose the Relative Bias framework, a method designed to assess how an LLM's behavior deviates from other LLMs within a specified target domain. We introduce two complementary methodologies: (1) Embedding Transformation analysis, which captures relative bias patterns through sentence representations over the embedding space, and (2) LLM-as-a-Judge, which employs a language model to evaluate outputs comparatively. Applying our framework to several case studies on bias and alignment scenarios following by statistical tests for validation, we find strong alignment between the two scoring methods, offering a systematic, scalable, and statistically grounded approach for comparative bias analysis in LLMs.