mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

MALIBU Benchmark: Multi-Agent LLM Implicit Bias Uncovered

arXiv 2507.01019 ↗First posted 10 Apr 2025cs.CL cs.CYcited by 3

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Social simulation and multi-agent debate

Abstract (arXiv)

Multi-agent systems, which consist of multiple AI models interacting within a shared environment, are increasingly used for persona-based interactions. However, if not carefully designed, these systems can reinforce implicit biases in large language models (LLMs), raising concerns about fairness and equitable representation. We present MALIBU, a novel benchmark developed to assess the degree to which LLM-based multi-agent systems implicitly reinforce social biases and stereotypes. MALIBU evaluates bias in LLM-based multi-agent systems through scenario-based assessments. AI models complete tasks within predefined contexts, and their responses undergo evaluation by an LLM-based multi-agent judging system in two phases. In the first phase, judges score responses labeled with specific demographic personas (e.g., gender, race, religion) across four metrics. In the second phase, judges compare paired responses assigned to different personas, scoring them and selecting the superior response. Our study quantifies biases in LLM-generated outputs, revealing that bias mitigation may favor marginalized personas over true neutrality, emphasizing the need for nuanced detection, balanced fairness strategies, and transparent evaluation benchmarks in multi-agent systems.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Social simulation and multi-agent debate, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 13 of its 21 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 10 Apr 2025.

Builds on

13 of 21 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024Towards Implicit Bias Detection and Mitigation in Multi-Agent LLM Interactions3 Oct

Other references · 12

  1. 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,393
  2. 2024Gemini 1.5: Unlocking multimodal understanding across millions of tokens of contextcited by 3,175
  3. 2020Language (Technology) is Power: A Critical Survey of "Bias" in NLPcited by 951
  4. 2016Semantics derived automatically from language corpora contain human-like biasescited by 894
  5. 2023Bias and Fairness in Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 626
  6. 2019The Woman Worked as a Babysitter: On Biases in Language Generationcited by 540
  7. 2019Measuring Bias in Contextualized Word Representationscited by 275
  8. 2024Agent-as-a-Judge: Evaluate Agents with Agentscited by 223
  9. 2023Bias Runs Deep: Implicit Reasoning Biases in Persona-Assigned LLMscited by 191
  10. 2024Quantifying the Persona Effect in LLM Simulationscited by 164
  11. 2024Bias in Large Language Models: Origin, Evaluation, and Mitigationcited by 77
  12. 2024Large Language Models Still Exhibit Bias in Long Textcited by 16

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2025: 3.

3 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025The Social Laboratory: A Psychometric Framework for Multi-Agent LLM Evaluation
  2. 2025Judging with Many Minds: Do More Perspectives Mean Less Prejudice? On Bias Amplifications and Resistance in Multi-Agent Based LLM-as-Judge
  3. 2025Your AI Bosses Are Still Prejudiced: The Emergence of Stereotypes in LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems
  4. 2025Structured Reasoning for Fairness: A Multi-Agent Approach to Bias Detection in Textual Data
  5. 2025Actions Speak Louder than Words: Agent Decisions Reveal Implicit Biases in Language Models
  6. 2026AgentFairBench: Do LLM Agents Discriminate When They Act?
  7. 2025Investigating Intersectional Bias in Large Language Models using Confidence Disparities in Coreference Resolution
  8. 2024Systematic Biases in LLM Simulations of Debates