mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Newer Is Not Fairer: Gender Stereotyping in Text-to-Image AI Across Model Generations

arXiv 2609.18007 ↗First posted 16 Sep 2026cs.CV cs.AI cs.CYcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Text-to-image generative models are widely used in professional and creative settings, yet how they represent gender across occupations -- and whether newer models are fairer -- remains poorly understood across multiple generations. We evaluate gender representation across 20 occupations, 5 prompt templates, and 4 Stable Diffusion model generations (SD 1.5, SD 2.1, SDXL, SD 3 Medium), generating 8,000 images with n = 100 per occupation-model cell (5 prompts x 20 images), and classifying all with DeepFace. Across the 8,000 open-source images, 76.4% show male subjects (95% CI [75.1%, 78.7%], p < 2.2 x 10^-16, Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted). More strikingly, 57.6% of images for historically female-coded occupations show male subjects (raw p = 3.43 x 10^-22, BH-adjusted p = 1.71 x 10^-21). All nine significant tests reported in this paper survive BH correction across 10 tests. When compared against U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics workforce data, models underrepresent women by 20-46pp on average, with particularly large deviations for near gender-balanced occupations: scientist (48% female in BLS, 82-99% male in model outputs) and cleaner (46% female in BLS, 80-92% male in outputs). Model generations do not improve steadily: bias worsens from SD 1.5 to SDXL before partially recovering in SD 3 Medium. A preliminary comparison with GPT-image-1 on five occupations suggests lower bias than open-source models, though the practical effect is small (Cramer's V = 0.080) and the comparison is exploratory. No model achieves gender parity.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 8 of its 13 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Sep 2026.

Builds on

8 of 13 references.

References · 8

  1. 2016Man is to Computer Programmer as Woman is to Homemaker? Debiasing Word Embeddingscited by 1,312
  2. 2021Ethical and social risks of harm from Language Modelscited by 966
  3. 2017Men Also Like Shopping: Reducing Gender Bias Amplification using Corpus-level Constraintscited by 420
  4. 2022Easily Accessible Text-to-Image Generation Amplifies Demographic Stereotypes at Large Scalecited by 262
  5. 2022DALL-Eval: Probing the Reasoning Skills and Social Biases of Text-to-Image Generation Modelscited by 230
  6. 2023Fair Diffusion: Instructing Text-to-Image Generation Models on Fairnesscited by 151
  7. 2022The Creativity of Text-to-Image Generationcited by 73
  8. 2023Multimodal Composite Association Score: Measuring Gender Bias in Generative Multimodal Modelscited by 21

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Automated Evaluation of Gender Bias Across 13 Large Multimodal Models
  2. 2025Hidden Bias in the Machine: Stereotypes in Text-to-Image Models
  3. 2024AI-generated faces influence gender stereotypes and racial homogenization
  4. 2023Stable Diffusion Exposed: Gender Bias from Prompt to Image
  5. 2026BAFIS: Dataset + Framework to assess occupational Bias and Human Preference in modern Text-to-image Models
  6. 2025Do Existing Testing Tools Really Uncover Gender Bias in Text-to-Image Models?
  7. 2023Social Biases through the Text-to-Image Generation Lens
  8. 2025Model-Agnostic Gender Bias Control for Text-to-Image Generation via Sparse Autoencoder