Revisiting LLM Value Probing Strategies: Are They Robust and Expressive?
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
There has been extensive research on assessing the value orientation of Large Language Models (LLMs) as it can shape user experiences across demographic groups. However, several challenges remain. First, while the Multiple Choice Question (MCQ) setting has been shown to be vulnerable to perturbations, there is no systematic comparison of probing methods for value probing. Second, it is unclear to what extent the probed values capture in-context information and reflect models' preferences for real-world actions. In this paper, we evaluate the robustness and expressiveness of value representations across three widely used probing strategies. We use variations in prompts and options, showing that all methods exhibit large variances under input perturbations. We also introduce two tasks studying whether the values are responsive to demographic context, and how well they align with the models' behaviors in value-related scenarios. We show that the demographic context has little effect on the free-text generation, and the models' values only weakly correlate with their preference for value-based actions. Our work highlights the need for a more careful examination of LLM value probing and awareness of its limitations.
Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 35 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Jul 2025.
Builds on
22 of 35 references.
References · 22
- 2020Language Models are Few-Shot Learnerscited by 32,419
- 2019Language Models as Knowledge Bases?cited by 1,936
- 2023Whose Opinions Do Language Models Reflect?cited by 773
- 2020Aligning AI With Shared Human Valuescited by 723
- 2023The Falcon Series of Open Language Modelscited by 535
- 2023Large Language Models Are Not Robust Multiple Choice Selectorscited by 486
- 2023Towards Measuring the Representation of Subjective Global Opinions in Language Modelscited by 437
- 2023Assessing Cross-Cultural Alignment between ChatGPT and Human Societies: An Empirical Studycited by 206
- 2023Do LLMs exhibit human-like response biases? A case study in survey designcited by 180
- 2021Large Pre-trained Language Models Contain Human-like Biases of What is Right and Wrong to Docited by 178
- 2022Probing Pre-Trained Language Models for Cross-Cultural Differences in Valuescited by 149
- 2024Investigating Cultural Alignment of Large Language Modelscited by 143
10 more
- 2024When Benchmarks are Targets: Revealing the Sensitivity of Large Language Model Leaderboardscited by 137
- 2022Who is GPT-3? An Exploration of Personality, Values and Demographicscited by 112
- 2022The Ghost in the Machine has an American accent: value conflict in GPT-3cited by 105
- 2024"My Answer is C": First-Token Probabilities Do Not Match Text Answers in Instruction-Tuned Language Modelscited by 69
- 2024Unintended Impacts of LLM Alignment on Global Representationcited by 66
- 2024Benchmarking Distributional Alignment of Large Language Modelscited by 61
- 2024Are Large Language Models Consistent over Value-laden Questions?cited by 58
- 2025Specializing Large Language Models to Simulate Survey Response Distributions for Global Populationscited by 53
- 2024Cultural Conditioning or Placebo? On the Effectiveness of Socio-Demographic Promptingcited by 22
- 2024High-Dimension Human Value Representation in Large Language Modelscited by 20
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 8.
8 papers.
- 2026When Do Language Models Endorse Limitations on Human Rights Principles?cited by 1
- 2026Distributional Open-Ended Evaluation of LLM Cultural Value Alignment Based on Value Codebookcited by 1
- 2026Moral Lenses, Political Coordinates: Towards Ideological Positioning of Morally Conditioned LLMscited by 0
- 2026Towards Cross-lingual Values Judgment: A Consensus-Pluralism Perspectivecited by 0
- 2026Modeling Community Attitude through Reaction Tone: A Human-AI Collaborative Framework for Evaluating LLM Alignment with Linguistic Behaviors in Online Communitiescited by 0
- 2026Vroom-Vroom at SHROOM-Visions: A Multi-Judge Committee for Detecting Hallucinated Spans in Vision-Language Outputscited by 0
- 2026GYROval: A Robust Benchmark for Cultural Value Orientation in Large Language Modelscited by 0
- 2026Encoded but Not Decoded: Layer-Localized Evidence for a Three-Level Gap in LLM Syntaxcited by 0
- 2026Encoded but Not Decoded: Layer-Localized Evidence for a Three-Level Gap in LLM Syntax24 Sep 2026
- 2026GYROval: A Robust Benchmark for Cultural Value Orientation in Large Language Models16 Sep 2026
- 2026Vroom-Vroom at SHROOM-Visions: A Multi-Judge Committee for Detecting Hallucinated Spans in Vision-Language Outputs15 Sep 2026
- 2026Modeling Community Attitude through Reaction Tone: A Human-AI Collaborative Framework for Evaluating LLM Alignment with Linguistic Behaviors in Online Communities12 Apr 2026
- 2026Distributional Open-Ended Evaluation of LLM Cultural Value Alignment Based on Value Codebook16 Mar 2026
- 2026When Do Language Models Endorse Limitations on Human Rights Principles?4 Mar 2026
- 2026Towards Cross-lingual Values Judgment: A Consensus-Pluralism Perspective19 Feb 2026
- 2026Moral Lenses, Political Coordinates: Towards Ideological Positioning of Morally Conditioned LLMs13 Jan 2026