FLEX: A Benchmark for Evaluating Robustness of Fairness in Large Language Models (2025.findings-naacl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing safety evaluations may overlook the inherent weaknesses of Large Language Models, despite their benefits. |
| Approach: | They propose a benchmark to evaluate the robustness of Large Language Models under extreme conditions. |
| Outcome: | The proposed approach evaluates the fairness of large language models under extreme conditions. |
Similar Papers
The Impossibility of Fair LLMs (2025.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing frameworks for evaluating large language models do not extend to general-purpose AI contexts or are infeasible in practice. |
| Approach: | They analyze a variety of technical fairness frameworks to find inherent challenges . they find that each framework does not logically extend to the general-purpose AI context . |
| Outcome: | The proposed frameworks do not logically extend to the general-purpose AI context or are infeasible in practice due to large amounts of unstructured training data and potential combinations of human populations, use cases, and sensitive attributes. |
ROBBIE: Robust Bias Evaluation of Large Generative Language Models (2023.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
David Esiobu, Xiaoqing Tan, Saghar Hosseini, Megan Ung, Yuchen Zhang, Jude Fernandes, Jane Dwivedi-Yu, Eleonora Presani, Adina Williams, Eric Smith
| Challenge: | generative large language models (LLMs) are becoming more performant and prevalent . we need tools to measure and improve their fairness, authors say . |
| Approach: | They propose to compare 6 different prompt-based bias and toxicity metrics across 12 demographic axes and 5 families of generative large language models. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model can be tested on more datasets to better characterize and mitigate biases . the study compared 6 prompt-based bias and toxicity metrics across 12 demographic axes and 5 families of generative large language models. |
SCORE: Systematic COnsistency and Robustness Evaluation for Large Language Models (2025.naacl-industry)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Typical evaluations of Large Language Models (LLMs) report a single accuracy metric per dataset, often derived from an optimized setup. |
| Approach: | They propose a framework for non-adversarial evaluation of large language models that evaluates models by repeatedly testing them on the same benchmarks in various setups. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework evaluates models by repeatedly testing them on the same benchmarks in various setups to give a realistic estimate of their accuracy and consistency. |
LLMEval-Fair: A Large-Scale Longitudinal Study on Robust and Fair Evaluation of Large Language Models (2026.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Ming Zhang, Yujiong Shen, Jingyi Deng, Yuhui Wang, Huayu Sha, Kexin Tan, Qiyuan Peng, Yue Zhang, Junzhe Wang, Shichun Liu, Yueyuan Huang, Jingqi Tong, Changhao Jiang, Yilong Wu, Zhihao Zhang, Mingqi Wu, Mingxu Chai, Zhiheng Xi, Shihan Dou, Tao Gui, Qi Zhang, Xuanjing Huang
| Challenge: | Existing evaluation of Large Language Models on static benchmarks is vulnerable to data contamination and leaderboard overfitting. |
| Approach: | LLMEval-Fair framework provides a framework for dynamic evaluation of Large Language Models . evaluators use a proprietary bank of 220k graduate-level questions to analyze model data . |
| Outcome: | LLMEval-Fair provides robust and credible evaluation framework for Large Language Models . it provides a strong empirical validation for the dynamic evaluation paradigm . |
Ready to Translate, Not to Represent? Bias and Performance Gaps in Multilingual LLMs Across Language Families and Domains (2026.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
Md. Faiyaz Abdullah Sayeedi, Subhey Sadi Rahman, Md. Mahbub Alam, Md. Adnanul Islam, Jannatul Ferdous Deepti, Tasnim Mohiuddin, Md Mofijul Islam, Swakkhar Shatabda
| Challenge: | Large Language Models (LLMs) have redefined Machine Translation, enabling context-aware and fluent translations across hundreds of languages and textual domains. |
| Approach: | They propose a framework and dataset to evaluate the translation quality and fairness of open-source LLMs. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework and dataset evaluates translation quality and fairness of open-source LLMs. |
LLMs Are Biased Towards Output Formats! Systematically Evaluating and Mitigating Output Format Bias of LLMs (2025.naacl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Do Xuan Long, Ngoc-Hai Nguyen, Tiviatis Sim, Hieu Dao, Shafiq Joty, Kenji Kawaguchi, Nancy F. Chen, Min-Yen Kan
| Challenge: | Using format-following capabilities, state-of-the-art large language models (LLMs) can be leveraged to tailor outputs to specific task formats. |
| Approach: | They propose to define a format bias evaluation metric and establish effective strategies to reduce it. |
| Outcome: | The proposed evaluation reduces the variance in ChatGPT’s performance among wrapping formats from 235.33 to 0.71 (%2) |
Large Language Models Are Still Misled by Simple Bias Ensembles (2026.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing benchmarks for large language models are constrained to datasets where each sample is manually injected with only one type of bias. |
| Approach: | They propose a multi-bias benchmark where each sample contains multiple types of biases. |
| Outcome: | The proposed benchmark shows that existing LLMs and debiasing methods perform poorly on this benchmark, highlighting the challenge of eliminating compounded biases. |
How Trustworthy are Open-Source LLMs? An Assessment under Malicious Demonstrations Shows their Vulnerabilities (2024.naacl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Rapid progress in open-source Large Language Models (LLMs) is driving AI development, but lacks sufficient trustworthiness to detect and mitigate adversarial demonstrations. |
| Approach: | They propose an extended Chain of Utterances-based (CoU) prompting strategy to attack open-source LLMs. |
| Outcome: | The proposed attack strategy is based on malicious demonstrations and toxicity tests on open-source models. |
A Study of Implicit Ranking Unfairness in Large Language Models (2024.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated superior ability to serve as ranking models, but they will exhibit discriminatory ranking behaviors based on users’ sensitive attributes (gender). |
| Approach: | They propose an evaluation method to investigate the severity of implicit ranking unfairness and a pair-wise regression method to conduct fair-aware data augmentation for LLM fine-tuning. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method outperforms existing methods in ranking fairness, achieving this with only a small reduction in accuracy. |
Safety of Large Language Models Beyond English: A Systematic Literature Review of Risks, Biases, and Safeguards (2026.eacl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large language models (LLMs) have a growing number of applications that generate harmful, biased, or unsafe content. |
| Approach: | They synthesize findings from recent studies that evaluate their robustness across languages . they highlight gaps in multilingual safety research and recommend future work . |
| Outcome: | The systematic review examines the multilingual safety of large language models in English . it identifies challenges such as dataset availability and evaluation biases . |