analiza aiqbench
This research critically examines how multilingual large language models conflate surface-level linguistic cues, such as names and wording, with genuine sociocultural understanding. By auditing over 89,000 outputs across three languages, the study reveals that removing explicit identity markers significantly alters bias detection in English and Chinese but has a muted effect in French, highlighting inconsistent cross-cultural patterns. The findings provide a necessary framework for distinguishing between superficial shortcuts and authentic cultural grounding in AI evaluations to prevent misleading conclusions about model behavior.
Beyond Surface Cues: Disentangling Sociocultural Signals in Multilingual LLMs
arXiv:2608.23026v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Multilingual LLM outputs can vary across sociocultural contexts. However, evidence of cultural grounding can be misleading: identity labels may be inferred from explicit or indirect textual cues, while names and wording can reveal the source language. Treating all these signals as evidence of cultural grounding may obscure potential biases. We present a human-validated, multi-agent audit that separates three questions: whether outputs reproduce social biases, whether identity groups are represented differently, and whether outputs reflect cross-cultural patterns. The study analyzes 89,253 outputs from 12 LLMs in English, French, and Chinese, spanning 18 occupations and three task conditions. We find that bias representation varies systematically across languages and tasks. Removing direct identity cues sharply reduces identity-label prediction in English and Chinese, but has a much smaller effect in French. Across all language-genre settings, the cultural context associated with the source language receives the highest average relevance score, with moderate agreement between automated and human ratings. However, the ability to identify the source language drops substantially after translation and again after masking names. Without these controls, multilingual audits may mistake surface cues for cultural understanding, leading to misleading conclusions about cross-cultural variation and bias. Our audit offers a practical framework for separating such shortcuts from more meaningful cross-cultural patterns.
Abstract:Multilingual LLM outputs can vary across sociocultural contexts. However, evidence of cultural grounding can be misleading: identity labels may be inferred from explicit or indirect textual cues, while names and wording can reveal the source language. Treating all these signals as evidence of cultural grounding may obscure potential biases. We present a human-validated, multi-agent audit that separates three questions: whether outputs reproduce social biases, whether identity groups are represented differently, and whether outputs reflect cross-cultural patterns. The study analyzes 89,253 outputs from 12 LLMs in English, French, and Chinese, spanning 18 occupations and three task conditions. We find that bias representation varies systematically across languages and tasks. Removing direct identity cues sharply reduces identity-label prediction in English and Chinese, but has a much smaller effect in French. Across all language-genre settings, the cultural context associated with the source language receives the highest average relevance score, with moderate agreement between automated and human ratings. However, the ability to identify the source language drops substantially after translation and again after masking names. Without these controls, multilingual audits may mistake surface cues for cultural understanding, leading to misleading conclusions about cross-cultural variation and bias. Our audit offers a practical framework for separating such shortcuts from more meaningful cross-cultural patterns.
Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2608.23026 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2608.23026v1 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.23026 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 304 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

Concrete Evaluations to Investigate the OpenAI Model That Hacked Hugging Face
AI Alignment Forum · 3 aug. 2026

The Culture Funnel: You can’t align what isn’t in the data
Cohere · 19 aug. 2026
RP-OPSD: Reasoning-Pivot-Guided On-Policy Self-Distillation for Multilingual Reasoning Transfer
arXiv · 7 aug. 2026
When Text Misleads: Inconsistent-Aware Reasoning for Audio-Grounded Dialogue
arXiv · 28 aug. 2026