When Neutral Summaries are not that Neutral: Quantifying Political Neutrality in LLM-Generated News Summaries
원문 초록
In an era where societal narratives are increasingly shaped by algorithmic curation, investigating the political neutrality of LLMs is an important research question. This study presents a fresh perspective on quantifying the political neutrality of LLMs through the lens of abstractive text summarization of polarizing news articles. We consider five pressing issues in current US politics: abortion, gun control/rights, healthcare, immigration, and LGBTQ+ rights. Via a substantial corpus of 20,344 news articles, our study reveals a consistent trend towards pro-Democratic biases in several well-known LLMs, with gun control and healthcare exhibiting the most pronounced biases (max polarization differences of -9.49% and -6.14%, respectively). Further analysis uncovers a strong convergence in the vocabulary of the LLM outputs for these divisive topics (55% overlap for Democrat-leaning representations, 52% for Republican). Being months away from a US election of consequence, we consider our findings important.
함께 살펴볼 논문
공통 태그를 근거로 연결했습니다. 실제 인용 관계나 논문의 우수성을 뜻하지 않습니다.
ARLED: Leveraging LED-based ARMAN Model for Abstractive Summarization of Persian Long Documents
A Split-then-Join Approach to Abstractive Summarization for Very Long Documents in a Low Resource Setting
LimTopic: LLM-based Topic Modeling and Text Summarization for Analyzing Scientific Articles limitations
ARC: Argument Representation and Coverage Analysis for Zero-Shot Long Document Summarization with Instruction Following LLMs
Comprehensive Manuscript Assessment with Text Summarization Using 69707 articles
Summarization Metrics for Spanish and Basque: Do Automatic Scores and LLM-Judges Correlate with Humans?
토론
이 논문과 연결된 포럼 글이 아직 없습니다.