Do Large Language Models Reflect Demographic Pluralism in Safety?
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Large Language Model (LLM) safety is inherently pluralistic, reflecting variations in moral norms, cultural expectations, and demographic contexts. Yet, existing alignment datasets such as ANTHROPIC-HH and DICES rely on demographically narrow annotator pools, overlooking variation in safety perception across communities. Demo-SafetyBench addresses this gap by modeling demographic pluralism directly at the prompt level, decoupling value framing from responses. In Stage I, prompts from DICES are reclassified into 14 safety domains (adapted from BEAVERTAILS) using Mistral 7B-Instruct-v0.3, retaining demographic metadata and expanding low-resource domains via Llama-3.1-8B-Instruct with SimHash-based deduplication, yielding 43,050 samples. In Stage II, pluralistic sensitivity is evaluated using LLMs-as-Raters-Gemma-7B, GPT-4o, and LLaMA-2-7B-under zero-shot inference. Balanced thresholds (delta = 0.5, tau = 10) achieve high reliability (ICC = 0.87) and low demographic sensitivity (DS = 0.12), confirming that pluralistic safety evaluation can be both scalable and demographically robust.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 21 of its 37 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Feb 2026.
Builds on
21 of 37 references.
References · 21
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
- 2021On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Modelscited by 3,961
- 2017Deep reinforcement learning from human preferencescited by 3,846
- 2021TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoodscited by 2,919
- 2016Equality of Opportunity in Supervised Learningcited by 2,000
- 2016Man is to Computer Programmer as Woman is to Homemaker? Debiasing Word Embeddingscited by 1,304
- 2020RealToxicityPrompts: Evaluating Neural Toxic Degeneration in Language Modelscited by 1,235
- 2023ChatGPT Outperforms Crowd-Workers for Text-Annotation Taskscited by 849
- 2023BeaverTails: Towards Improved Safety Alignment of LLM via a Human-Preference Datasetcited by 828
- 2023Whose Opinions Do Language Models Reflect?cited by 759
- 2020Artificial Intelligence, Values and Alignmentcited by 443
- 2021Unsolved Problems in ML Safetycited by 291
9 more
- 2024LLMs instead of Human Judges? A Large Scale Empirical Study across 20 NLP Evaluation Taskscited by 236
- 2023Cultural Alignment in Large Language Models: An Explanatory Analysis Based on Hofstede's Cultural Dimensionscited by 111
- 2023DICES Dataset: Diversity in Conversational AI Evaluation for Safetycited by 86
- 2024The Dark Side of Dataset Scaling: Evaluating Racial Classification in Multimodal Modelscited by 23
- 2025Segmenting Text and Learning Their Rewards for Improved RLHF in Language Modelcited by 12
- 2025Too Helpful, Too Harmless, Too Honest or Just Right?cited by 9
- 2025Steering Towards Fairness: Mitigating Political Bias in LLMscited by 7
- 2025Should LLM Safety Be More Than Refusing Harmful Instructions?cited by 6
- 2025Truth, Trust, and Trouble: Medical AI on the Edgecited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.