Large Language Models are Perplexed by some Political Parties

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.05937v1
• Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2026 09:39:05 GMT
• Title: Large Language Models are Perplexed by some Political Parties
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used, including in political applications, but their political fairness has been little studied.<n>We assess it using perplexity, posing that a fair model should give equal probability to all political groups.<n>We find that across ten LLMs and three datasets covering 37 languages, that LLMs are more perplexed by the texts of far right and nationalist parties than of social-democratic parties.
• Score: 19.75260643083416
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used, including in political applications, but their political fairness has been little studied. We assess it using perplexity, posing that a fair model should give equal probability to all political groups. However, we find, across ten LLMs and three datasets covering 37 languages, that LLMs are more perplexed by the texts of far right and nationalist parties than of social-democratic parties. We find this to be consistent with previous work on translation fairness, to the point that perplexity correlates with downstream translation metrics. Our method is applicable to both base LLMs as well as their instruction-tuned counterpart, and we find that both are highly correlated, suggesting that the political fairness of LLMs stems from their pretraining, and is hardly affected by instruction-tuning.

Related papers

• Benchmarking Gender and Political Bias in Large Language Models [37.192287982246526]
  We introduce EuroParlVote, a novel benchmark for evaluating large language models (LLMs) in politically sensitive contexts.<n>It links European Parliament debate speeches to roll-call vote outcomes and includes rich demographic metadata for each Member of the European Parliament (MEP)<n>Using EuroParlVote, we evaluate state-of-the-art LLMs on two tasks -- gender classification and vote prediction -- revealing consistent patterns of bias.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-07T18:23:30Z)
• Democratic or Authoritarian? Probing a New Dimension of Political Biases in Large Language Models [72.89977583150748]
  We propose a novel methodology to assess how Large Language Models align with broader geopolitical value systems.<n>We find that LLMs generally favor democratic values and leaders, but exhibit increases favorability toward authoritarian figures when prompted in Mandarin.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-15T07:52:07Z)
• PolyMath: Evaluating Mathematical Reasoning in Multilingual Contexts [85.78821098963607]
  PolyMath is a multilingual mathematical reasoning benchmark covering 18 languages and 4 easy-to-hard difficulty levels.<n>Our benchmark ensures difficulty comprehensiveness, language diversity, and high-quality translation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-25T15:39:04Z)
• Large Language Models Reflect the Ideology of their Creators [71.65505524599888]
  Large language models (LLMs) are trained on vast amounts of data to generate natural language.<n>This paper shows that the ideological stance of an LLM appears to reflect the worldview of its creators.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-24T04:02:30Z)
• Transforming Scholarly Landscapes: Influence of Large Language Models on Academic Fields beyond Computer Science [77.31665252336157]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have ushered in a transformative era in Natural Language Processing (NLP) This work empirically examines the influence and use of LLMs in fields beyond NLP.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-29T01:32:35Z)
• Assessing Political Bias in Large Language Models [0.624709220163167]
  We evaluate the political bias of open-source Large Language Models (LLMs) concerning political issues within the European Union (EU) from a German voter's perspective. We show that larger models, such as Llama3-70B, tend to align more closely with left-leaning political parties, while smaller models often remain neutral.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-17T15:30:18Z)
• Whose Side Are You On? Investigating the Political Stance of Large Language Models [56.883423489203786]
  We investigate the political orientation of Large Language Models (LLMs) across a spectrum of eight polarizing topics. Our investigation delves into the political alignment of LLMs across a spectrum of eight polarizing topics, spanning from abortion to LGBTQ issues. The findings suggest that users should be mindful when crafting queries, and exercise caution in selecting neutral prompt language.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-15T04:02:24Z)
• Large Language Models: A Survey [66.39828929831017]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have drawn a lot of attention due to their strong performance on a wide range of natural language tasks.<n>LLMs' ability of general-purpose language understanding and generation is acquired by training billions of model's parameters on massive amounts of text data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-09T05:37:09Z)
• The Political Preferences of LLMs [0.0]
  I administer 11 political orientation tests, designed to identify the political preferences of the test taker, to 24 state-of-the-art conversational LLMs. Most conversational LLMs generate responses that are diagnosed by most political test instruments as manifesting preferences for left-of-center viewpoints. I demonstrate that LLMs can be steered towards specific locations in the political spectrum through Supervised Fine-Tuning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-02T02:43:10Z)
• Adapting Large Language Models for Document-Level Machine Translation [46.370862171452444]
  Large language models (LLMs) have significantly advanced various natural language processing (NLP) tasks. Recent research indicates that moderately-sized LLMs often outperform larger ones after task-specific fine-tuning. This study focuses on adapting LLMs for document-level machine translation (DocMT) for specific language pairs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-12T09:29:13Z)
• Positioning Political Texts with Large Language Models by Asking and Averaging [0.0]
  We ask an LLM where a tweet or a sentence of a political text stands on the focal dimension and take the average of the LLM responses to position political actors. The correlations between the position estimates obtained with the best LLMs and benchmarks based on text coding by experts, crowdworkers, or roll call votes exceed.90. Using instruction-tuned LLMs to position texts in policy and ideological spaces is fast, cost-efficient, reliable, and reproducible (in the case of open LLMs) even if the texts are short and written in different languages.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-28T09:45:02Z)
• Exploring the Jungle of Bias: Political Bias Attribution in Language Models via Dependency Analysis [86.49858739347412]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have sparked intense debate regarding the prevalence of bias in these models and its mitigation. We propose a prompt-based method for the extraction of confounding and mediating attributes which contribute to the decision process. We find that the observed disparate treatment can at least in part be attributed to confounding and mitigating attributes and model misalignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-15T00:02:25Z)

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.