Sima AIunty: Caste Audit in LLM-Driven Matchmaking

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2603.29288v1
• Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2026 05:44:55 GMT
• Title: Sima AIunty: Caste Audit in LLM-Driven Matchmaking
• Abstract summary: We conduct a controlled audit of caste bias in large language models (LLMs)-mediated matchmaking evaluations.<n>We vary caste identity across Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya, Shudra, and Dalit, and income across five buckets.<n>Our analysis reveals consistent hierarchical patterns across models: same-caste matches are rated most favorably, with average ratings up to 25% higher than inter-caste matches.
• Score: 10.466211034402386
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Social and personal decisions in relational domains such as matchmaking are deeply entwined with cultural norms and historical hierarchies, and can potentially be shaped by algorithmic and AI-mediated assessments of compatibility, acceptance, and stability. In South Asian contexts, caste remains a central aspect of marital decision-making, yet little is known about how contemporary large language models (LLMs) reproduce or disrupt caste-based stratification in such settings. In this work, we conduct a controlled audit of caste bias in LLM-mediated matchmaking evaluations using real-world matrimonial profiles. We vary caste identity across Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya, Shudra, and Dalit, and income across five buckets, and evaluate five LLM families (GPT, Gemini, Llama, Qwen, and BharatGPT). Models are prompted to assess profiles along dimensions of social acceptance, marital stability, and cultural compatibility. Our analysis reveals consistent hierarchical patterns across models: same-caste matches are rated most favorably, with average ratings up to 25% higher (on a 10-point scale) than inter-caste matches, which are further ordered according to traditional caste hierarchy. These findings highlight how existing caste hierarchies are reproduced in LLM decision-making and underscore the need for culturally grounded evaluation and intervention strategies in AI systems deployed in socially sensitive domains, where such systems risk reinforcing historical forms of exclusion.

Related papers

• Do LLMs Have Values? A Quantitative Analysis and Alignment Framework for Values in Large Language Models [49.45276299939287]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) increasingly handle complex subjective tasks.<n>LLMs fluctuate unpredictably under minor wording changes.<n> resolving this duality is critical for reliable AI alignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-15T03:35:04Z)
• To Compare, or Not to Compare: On Methodological Practices in Evaluating Social Bias [61.40435736418359]
  We introduce a unified framework that standardizes heterogeneous benchmarks to contrast isolated demographic assessments with forced-choice comparative settings.<n>We show that comparative settings act as aggressive catalysts for latent discrimination, a shift primarily driven by underspecified contexts.<n>Finally, we demonstrate that this comparative prejudice is a generalized phenomenon that scales positively with model size.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-23T13:53:50Z)
• Auditing LLM-Governed Social Robots with Culture-Specific Moral Gradients [13.60111351173797]
  LLM-governed social robots increasingly decide who receives real-world assistance first.<n>As prioritization norms vary across cultures by age, status, and group size, failure to calibrate pluralistically can scale into unequal access.<n>We introduce a gradient-based audit framework for multilingual evaluation of LLM moral trade-off behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-02T10:22:53Z)
• Beyond Categories of Caste: Examining Caste Bias and Morality in Text-to-Image AI Models [17.19140224115358]
  Recent work has shown caste biases and stereotypes are being perpetuated through Generative AI (GenAI) systems.<n>We shift our ontology to focus on the relational aspect of caste.<n>We propose an anti-caste approach to tackle the issue of caste bias and fairness in AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-28T03:13:11Z)
• IndiCASA: A Dataset and Bias Evaluation Framework in LLMs Using Contrastive Embedding Similarity in the Indian Context [10.90604216960609]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have gained significant traction across critical domains owing to their impressive contextual understanding and generative capabilities.<n>We propose an evaluation framework based on a encoder trained using contrastive learning that captures fine-grained bias through embedding similarity.<n>We also introduce a novel dataset - IndiCASA (IndiBias-based Contextually Aligned Stereotypes and Anti-stereotypes) comprising 2,575 human-validated sentences spanning five demographic axes: caste, gender, religion, disability, and socioeconomic status.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-03T06:03:26Z)
• FairI Tales: Evaluation of Fairness in Indian Contexts with a Focus on Bias and Stereotypes [23.71105683137539]
  Existing studies on fairness are largely Western-focused, making them inadequate for culturally diverse countries such as India.<n>We introduce INDIC-BIAS, a comprehensive India-centric benchmark designed to evaluate fairness of LLMs across 85 socio identity groups.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-29T06:31:06Z)
• DECASTE: Unveiling Caste Stereotypes in Large Language Models through Multi-Dimensional Bias Analysis [20.36241144630387]
  Large language models (LLMs) have revolutionized natural language processing (NLP)<n>LLMs have been shown to reflect and perpetuate harmful societal biases, including those based on ethnicity, gender, and religion.<n>We propose DECASTE, a novel framework designed to detect and assess both implicit and explicit caste biases in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-20T23:19:13Z)
• The Root Shapes the Fruit: On the Persistence of Gender-Exclusive Harms in Aligned Language Models [91.86718720024825]
  We center transgender, nonbinary, and other gender-diverse identities to investigate how alignment procedures interact with pre-existing gender-diverse bias.<n>Our findings reveal that DPO-aligned models are particularly sensitive to supervised finetuning.<n>We conclude with recommendations tailored to DPO and broader alignment practices.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-06T06:50:50Z)
• GenderCARE: A Comprehensive Framework for Assessing and Reducing Gender Bias in Large Language Models [73.23743278545321]
  Large language models (LLMs) have exhibited remarkable capabilities in natural language generation, but have also been observed to magnify societal biases.<n>GenderCARE is a comprehensive framework that encompasses innovative Criteria, bias Assessment, Reduction techniques, and Evaluation metrics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-22T15:35:46Z)
• Social Debiasing for Fair Multi-modal LLMs [59.61512883471714]
  Multi-modal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have dramatically advanced the research field and delivered powerful vision-language understanding capabilities.<n>These models often inherit deep-rooted social biases from their training data, leading to uncomfortable responses with respect to attributes such as race and gender.<n>This paper addresses the issue of social biases in MLLMs by introducing a comprehensive counterfactual dataset with multiple social concepts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-13T02:08:32Z)
• Training Socially Aligned Language Models on Simulated Social Interactions [99.39979111807388]
  Social alignment in AI systems aims to ensure that these models behave according to established societal values. Current language models (LMs) are trained to rigidly replicate their training corpus in isolation. This work presents a novel training paradigm that permits LMs to learn from simulated social interactions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-26T14:17:36Z)
• Decoding Demographic un-fairness from Indian Names [4.402336973466853]
  Demographic classification is essential in fairness assessment in recommender systems or in measuring unintended bias in online networks and voting systems. We collect three publicly available datasets to train state-of-the-art classifiers in the domain of gender and caste classification. We perform cross-testing (training and testing on different datasets) to understand the efficacy of the above models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-07T11:54:49Z)

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.