How Temperature Shapes Ideological Discourse in Retrieval-Augmented Generation?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.11783v1
• Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2026 16:36:59 GMT
• Title: How Temperature Shapes Ideological Discourse in Retrieval-Augmented Generation?
• Abstract summary: Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) has been increasingly adopted to reduce hallucinations.<n>Impact of ideological bias on large language models (LLMs) has been overlooked.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) has been increasingly adopted to reduce hallucinations and strengthen the factual grounding of large language models (LLMs). While robustness to errors in the retrieval process has been explored, the impact of ideological bias on LLM outputs has been overlooked. For instance, if the retrieved material contains ideological positions, the RAG may transmit, amplify, or suppress such ideological discourses in its outputs. In this study, we address this issue by examining the influence of the RAG framework, comprising ideological discourses, in LLM-generated answers. To this end, we applied Lexical Multidimensional Analysis (LMDA) on a corpus of 1,117 COVID-19 treatment articles, identifying three ideological discourses. This corpus is then used as the external knowledge source for the RAG. We assessed several LLMs by having the models answer ideological questions at different sampling temperatures. The generated texts were assessed semantically and lexically based on their similarities with ideological reference texts. Our findings show that the RAG framework is prone to transferring ideological discourses into LLM responses, with sampling temperature having a measurable impact on the strength of this transfer. Discoursive alignment between generated answers and the reference text is highest at moderate temperatures, where models balance stochasticity with retrieval grounding, and drops at low temperatures, indicating that overly deterministic sampling suppresses discourse transfer.

Related papers

• HistoRAG: Embedding Historical Methodology in Retrieval-Augmented Generation Through Critical Technical Practice [0.0]
  We introduce Histoe, a framework that translates historiographical principles into architectural interventions.<n>Separated retrieval and generation decouples source discovery from interpretation, temporal windowing enforces balanced source representation.<n>We evaluate these interventions using SPIEGELagged, applied to 102,189 articles from Der Spiegel (19501979)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-16T16:03:37Z)
• Lost in the Evidence? Reproducing Document Position and Context Size Effects in RAG [3.597778914286147]
  Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems rely on retrieved documents being input to a model's input context.<n>Prior work reports position-based effects such as lost in the middle and related long-context phenomena.<n>We show that topic sampling is a major source of variance: small topic sets can exaggerate ordering effects.<n>We also study a more realistic RAG scenario in which relevance is mediated by a retriever rather than oracle access to ground-truth documents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-26T14:44:19Z)
• The Impact of Ideological Discourses in RAG: A Case Study with COVID-19 Treatments [0.0]
  This paper studies the impact of retrieved ideological texts on the outputs of large language models (LLMs)<n>Our corpus is based on 1,117 academic articles representing discourses about controversial and endorsed treatments for the disease.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-16T05:32:30Z)
• Passing the Turing Test in Political Discourse: Fine-Tuning LLMs to Mimic Polarized Social Media Comments [0.0]
  This study explores the extent to which fine-tuned large language models (LLMs) can replicate and amplify polarizing discourse.<n>Using a curated dataset of politically charged discussions extracted from Reddit, we fine-tune an open-source LLM to produce context-aware and ideologically aligned responses.<n>The results indicate that, when trained on partisan data, LLMs are capable of producing highly plausible and provocative comments, often indistinguishable from those written by humans.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-17T15:41:26Z)
• Learning Interpretable Representations Leads to Semantically Faithful EEG-to-Text Generation [52.51005875755718]
  We focus on EEG-to-text decoding and address its hallucination issue through the lens of posterior collapse.<n>Acknowledging the underlying mismatch in information capacity between EEG and text, we reframe the decoding task as semantic summarization of core meanings.<n>Experiments on the public ZuCo dataset demonstrate that GLIM consistently generates fluent, EEG-grounded sentences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-21T05:29:55Z)
• Improving Multilingual Retrieval-Augmented Language Models through Dialectic Reasoning Argumentations [65.11348389219887]
  We introduce Dialectic-RAG (DRAG), a modular approach that evaluates retrieved information by comparing, contrasting, and resolving conflicting perspectives.<n>We show the impact of our framework both as an in-context learning strategy and for constructing demonstrations to instruct smaller models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-07T06:55:15Z)
• Towards More Robust Retrieval-Augmented Generation: Evaluating RAG Under Adversarial Poisoning Attacks [45.07581174558107]
  Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) systems have emerged as a promising solution to mitigate hallucinations.<n>RAG systems are vulnerable to adversarial poisoning attacks, where malicious passages injected into the retrieval corpus can mislead models into producing factually incorrect outputs.<n>We present a rigorously controlled empirical study of how RAG systems behave under such attacks and how their robustness can be improved.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-21T17:31:52Z)
• 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)
• Sentiment Analysis through LLM Negotiations [58.67939611291001]
  A standard paradigm for sentiment analysis is to rely on a singular LLM and makes the decision in a single round. This paper introduces a multi-LLM negotiation framework for sentiment analysis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-03T12:35:29Z)
• Self-RAG: Learning to Retrieve, Generate, and Critique through Self-Reflection [74.51523859064802]
  We introduce a new framework called Self-Reflective Retrieval-Augmented Generation (Self-RAG) Self-RAG enhances an LM's quality and factuality through retrieval and self-reflection. It significantly outperforms state-of-the-art LLMs and retrieval-augmented models on a diverse set of tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-17T18:18:32Z)
• Benchmarking Large Language Models in Retrieval-Augmented Generation [53.504471079548]
  We systematically investigate the impact of Retrieval-Augmented Generation on large language models. We analyze the performance of different large language models in 4 fundamental abilities required for RAG. We establish Retrieval-Augmented Generation Benchmark (RGB), a new corpus for RAG evaluation in both English and Chinese.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-04T08:28:44Z)

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.