Remembering Unequally: Global and Disciplinary Bias in LLM-Generated Co-Authorship Networks

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2511.00476v1
• Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2025 10:05:43 GMT
• Title: Remembering Unequally: Global and Disciplinary Bias in LLM-Generated Co-Authorship Networks
• Authors: Ghazal Kalhor, Afra Mashhadi,
• Abstract summary: This study examines the impact of Large Language Models (LLMs) on the co-authorship networks.<n>We assess effects across three prominent models, DeepSeek R1, Llama 4 Scout, and Mixtral 8x7B.<n>While our global analysis reveals a consistent bias favoring highly cited researchers, this pattern is not uniformly observed.<n>Certain disciplines, such as Clinical Medicine, and regions, including parts of Africa, show more balanced representation.
• Score: 3.179831861897336
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Ongoing breakthroughs in Large Language Models (LLMs) are reshaping search and recommendation platforms at their core. While this shift unlocks powerful new scientometric tools, it also exposes critical fairness and bias issues that could erode the integrity of the information ecosystem. Additionally, as LLMs become more integrated into web-based searches for scholarly tools, their ability to generate summarized research work based on memorized data introduces new dimensions to these challenges. The extent of memorization in LLMs can impact the accuracy and fairness of the co-authorship networks they produce, potentially reflecting and amplifying existing biases within the scientific community and across different regions. This study critically examines the impact of LLM memorization on the co-authorship networks. To this end, we assess memorization effects across three prominent models, DeepSeek R1, Llama 4 Scout, and Mixtral 8x7B, analyzing how memorization-driven outputs vary across academic disciplines and world regions. While our global analysis reveals a consistent bias favoring highly cited researchers, this pattern is not uniformly observed. Certain disciplines, such as Clinical Medicine, and regions, including parts of Africa, show more balanced representation, pointing to areas where LLM training data may reflect greater equity. These findings underscore both the risks and opportunities in deploying LLMs for scholarly discovery.

Related papers

• Inverse Reinforcement Learning Meets Large Language Model Post-Training: Basics, Advances, and Opportunities [62.05713042908654]
  This paper provides a review of advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) alignment through the lens of inverse reinforcement learning (IRL)<n>We highlight the necessity of constructing neural reward models from human data and discuss the formal and practical implications of this paradigm shift.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-17T14:22:24Z)
• A General Method for Detecting Information Generated by Large Language Models [1.3624495460189865]
  Large language models (LLMs) have transformed the digital information landscape, making it challenging to distinguish between human-written and LLM-generated content.<n>Current detection methods face challenges in generalizing to new (i.e., unseen) LLMs and domains.<n>We introduce a general LLM detector (GLD) that combines a twin memory networks design and a theory-guided detection generalization module.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-18T04:59:51Z)
• Injecting Domain-Specific Knowledge into Large Language Models: A Comprehensive Survey [45.918134803778834]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable success in various tasks such as natural language understanding, text summarization, and machine translation.<n>Their general-purpose nature often limits their effectiveness in domain-specific applications that require specialized knowledge, such as healthcare, chemistry, or legal analysis.<n>To address this, researchers have explored diverse methods to enhance LLMs by integrating domain-specific knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-15T07:43:43Z)
• Probing Ranking LLMs: A Mechanistic Analysis for Information Retrieval [20.353393773305672]
  We employ a probing-based analysis to examine neuron activations in ranking LLMs.<n>Our study spans a broad range of feature categories, including lexical signals, document structure, query-document interactions, and complex semantic representations.<n>Our findings offer crucial insights for developing more transparent and reliable retrieval systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-24T08:20:10Z)
• Beyond Binary: Towards Fine-Grained LLM-Generated Text Detection via Role Recognition and Involvement Measurement [51.601916604301685]
  Large language models (LLMs) generate content that can undermine trust in online discourse.<n>Current methods often focus on binary classification, failing to address the complexities of real-world scenarios like human-LLM collaboration.<n>To move beyond binary classification and address these challenges, we propose a new paradigm for detecting LLM-generated content.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-18T08:14:10Z)
• LLM Inference Unveiled: Survey and Roofline Model Insights [62.92811060490876]
  Large Language Model (LLM) inference is rapidly evolving, presenting a unique blend of opportunities and challenges. Our survey stands out from traditional literature reviews by not only summarizing the current state of research but also by introducing a framework based on roofline model. This framework identifies the bottlenecks when deploying LLMs on hardware devices and provides a clear understanding of practical problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-26T07:33:05Z)
• Large Language Models for Causal Discovery: Current Landscape and Future Directions [5.540272236593385]
  Causal discovery (CD) and Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as transformative fields in artificial intelligence.<n>This survey examines how LLMs are transforming CD across three key dimensions: direct causal extraction from text, integration of domain knowledge into statistical methods, and refinement of causal structures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-16T20:48:53Z)
• EpiK-Eval: Evaluation for Language Models as Epistemic Models [16.485951373967502]
  We introduce EpiK-Eval, a novel question-answering benchmark tailored to evaluate LLMs' proficiency in formulating a coherent and consistent knowledge representation from segmented narratives. We argue that these shortcomings stem from the intrinsic nature of prevailing training objectives. The findings from this study offer insights for developing more robust and reliable LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-23T21:15:54Z)
• Survey on Factuality in Large Language Models: Knowledge, Retrieval and Domain-Specificity [61.54815512469125]
  This survey addresses the crucial issue of factuality in Large Language Models (LLMs) As LLMs find applications across diverse domains, the reliability and accuracy of their outputs become vital.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-11T14:18:03Z)
• TRACE: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Continual Learning in Large Language Models [52.734140807634624]
  Aligned large language models (LLMs) demonstrate exceptional capabilities in task-solving, following instructions, and ensuring safety. Existing continual learning benchmarks lack sufficient challenge for leading aligned LLMs. We introduce TRACE, a novel benchmark designed to evaluate continual learning in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-10T16:38:49Z)
• Sentiment Analysis in the Era of Large Language Models: A Reality Check [69.97942065617664]
  This paper investigates the capabilities of large language models (LLMs) in performing various sentiment analysis tasks. We evaluate performance across 13 tasks on 26 datasets and compare the results against small language models (SLMs) trained on domain-specific datasets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-24T10:45:25Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.