Dual-Metric Evaluation of Social Bias in Large Language Models: Evidence from an Underrepresented Nepali Cultural Context
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language models (LLMs) increasingly influence global digital ecosystems, yet their potential to perpetuate social and cultural biases remains poorly understood in underrepresented contexts. This study presents a systematic analysis of representational biases in seven state-of-the-art LLMs: GPT-4o-mini, Claude-3-Sonnet, Claude-4-Sonnet, Gemini-2.0-Flash, Gemini-2.0-Lite, Llama-3-70B, and Mistral-Nemo in the Nepali cultural context. Using Croissant-compliant dataset of 2400+ stereotypical and anti-stereotypical sentence pairs on gender roles across social domains, we implement an evaluation framework, Dual-Metric Bias Assessment (DMBA), combining two metrics: (1) agreement with biased statements and (2) stereotypical completion tendencies. Results show models exhibit measurable explicit agreement bias, with mean bias agreement ranging from 0.36 to 0.43 across decoding configurations, and an implicit completion bias rate of 0.740-0.755. Importantly, implicit completion bias follows a non-linear, U-shaped relationship with temperature, peaking at moderate stochasticity (T=0.3) and declining slightly at higher temperatures. Correlation analysis under different decoding settings revealed that explicit agreement strongly aligns with stereotypical sentence agreement but is a weak and often negative predictor of implicit completion bias, indicating generative bias is poorly captured by agreement metrics. Sensitivity analysis shows increasing top-p amplifies explicit bias, while implicit generative bias remains largely stable. Domain-level analysis shows implicit bias is strongest for race and sociocultural stereotypes, while explicit agreement bias is similar across gender and sociocultural categories, with race showing the lowest explicit agreement. These findings highlight the need for culturally grounded datasets and debiasing strategies for LLMs in underrepresented societies.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 17 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Mar 2026.
Builds on
17 of 38 references.
References · 17
- 2020Language (Technology) is Power: A Critical Survey of "Bias" in NLPcited by 951
- 2020StereoSet: Measuring stereotypical bias in pretrained language modelscited by 911
- 2016Semantics derived automatically from language corpora contain human-like biasescited by 894
- 2021BOLD: Dataset and Metrics for Measuring Biases in Open-Ended Language Generationcited by 410
- 2024A Survey on Multilingual Large Language Models: Corpora, Alignment, and Biascited by 82
- 2024Croissant: A Metadata Format for ML-Ready Datasetscited by 79
- 2022Re-contextualizing Fairness in NLP: The Case of Indiacited by 55
- 2024Measuring Implicit Bias in Explicitly Unbiased Large Language Modelscited by 49
- 2025Explicit vs. Implicit: Investigating Social Bias in Large Language Models through Self-Reflectioncited by 25
- 2021Evaluating Gender Bias in Hindi-English Machine Translationcited by 19
- 2023A Paradigm Shift: The Future of Machine Translation Lies with Large Language Modelscited by 19
- 2024Akal Badi ya Bias: An Exploratory Study of Gender Bias in Hindi Language Technologycited by 17
5 more
- 2025DECASTE: Unveiling Caste Stereotypes in Large Language Models through Multi-Dimensional Bias Analysiscited by 12
- 2024Lazy Data Practices Harm Fairness Researchcited by 10
- 2024Understanding Intrinsic Socioeconomic Biases in Large Language Modelscited by 9
- 2024'Since Lawyers are Males..': Examining Implicit Gender Bias in Hindi Language Generation by LLMscited by 7
- 2024Epistemic Power in AI Ethics Labor: Legitimizing Located Complaintscited by 6
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.