最新资讯
dev.to 我们在 DolphinBench 上测试记忆检索:纯关键词搜索暴露了自身回归 dev.to 别再把 Agent 写成 while 循环,把它建模为状态机 bloomberg.com Rightmove 与 Scout24 借 AI 产品应对低迷房市并上调展望 stackoverflow.blog 欢迎来到芯片时代:半导体制造、AI 数据中心与芯片设计的未来 www.youtube.com AI Agent 总犯同样的错:CentralAgent AI 将记忆重构为经验系统 pub.towardsai.net Netflix 科学家建议重采样 LLM 评判:5 次仅将误差棒缩小 13% pub.towardsai.net Jev 作为 LLM 前的静默层:构建提示感知的模型路由器 reddit.com OpenAI 称 Astra 仅满足 10% 安全任务标准 dev.to FreeToken:在自有 GPU 上运行前沿 MoE 模型及其内存需求 dev.to 当 AI Agent 说“完成”时,究竟完成了什么? dev.to 部署 Underdog Bark 3.0 Pro:逐字转写、自定义后端与分块设置 dev.to 为艰难对话构建 AI:五个 Agent、一条安全正则与一位盲评监督者
多元动态
登录 注册
大模型 arxiv.org ·

大型语言模型低估且部分歪曲了日常规范中的文化差异

原文 我的收藏

该研究以全球日常规范研究(GSEN)在 90 个社会、150 个场景的人类评分为基准,测试 GPT-5、GPT-5.4、Claude Opus 4.6 和 Gemini 3.1 Pro 对文化差异的估计。结果显示四款模型均大幅低估社会间差异幅度(平均不足实测一半),且对多数场景的差异模式识别不佳;涉及粗俗、亲吻和调情等场景识别相对较好。较发达社会的规范估计略准,改用本地语言提问仅带来小幅改善,并未消除差异低估。作者认为 LLM 对日常规范文化差异的表征既弱又不均衡。

AI推荐理由 arXiv 论文,基于 GSEN 在 90 个社会、150 个场景的人类评分基准,测试 GPT-5、GPT-5.4、Claude Opus 4.6、Gemini 3.1 Pro 对日常规范文化差异的估计。具体新信息:四款模型均低估社会间差异幅度(平均不足实测一半),且对多数场景的差异模式识别不佳;涉及粗俗、亲吻调情类场景识别较好;较发达社会规范估计略准;用本地语言提问仅小幅改善,且未消除差异低估。局限:仅覆盖日常规范这一维度,摘要未给出具体误差数值与统计细节。

72

正文

Computer Science > Computers and Society arXiv:2609.30896 (cs) [Submitted on 25 Sep 2026] Title:Large language models underestimate and partly misrepresent cultural variation in everyday norms Authors:Kimmo Eriksson, Irina Vartanova, Pontus Strimling View a PDF of the paper titled Large language models underestimate and partly misrepresent cultural variation in everyday norms, by Kimmo Eriksson and 2 other authors View PDF HTML (experimental) Abstract:A key aspect of culture is a society's norms about everyday behavior. How accurately do large language models (LLMs) represent cultural differences in such norms? To answer this question we used the recent Global Study of Everyday Norms (GSEN), which collected ratings of 150 scenarios in 90 societies, as the human benchmark. We prompted GPT-5 to estimate each society's average rating for every scenario, and later repeated the benchmark in three other LLMs: GPT-5.4, Claude Opus 4.6, and Gemini 3.1 Pro. Compared to GSEN estimates, all four LLMs misrepresented cultural variation in two ways. First, they greatly underestimated its magnitude, estimating differences between societies to be, on average, less than half their measured size. Second, for many scenarios the LLMs poorly identified the pattern of variation, that is, which societies judged the behavior less acceptable and which societies judged it more acceptable. The pattern of variation was identified better for scenarios that elicit concerns about vulgarity, especially scenarios involving kissing and flirting. We also found that norms in more developed societies tended to be estimated somewhat more accurately, and that prompting in local survey languages rather than English produced only a modest improvement in accuracy. Local-language prompting also reduced, but did not remove, the underestimation of between-society differences. Cultural differences in everyday norms are only weakly and unevenly represented by LLMs. Subjects: Computers and Society (cs.CY) ACM classes: J.4; K.4.m; C.4 Cite as: arXiv:2609.30896 [cs.CY] (or arXiv:2609.30896v1 [cs.CY] for this version) https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.30896 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration) Submission history From: Kimmo Eriksson [view email] [v1] Fri, 25 Sep 2026 07:04:13 UTC (1,308 KB) Full-text links: Access Paper: View a PDF of the paper titled Large language models underestimate and partly misrepresent cultural variation in everyday norms, by Kimmo Eriksson and 2 other authors View PDF HTML (experimental) TeX Source view license Current browse context: cs.CY new | recent | 2026-09 Change to browse by: cs References & Citations NASA ADS Google Scholar Semantic Scholar export BibTeX citation Loading... BibTeX formatted citation × loading... Data provided by: Bookmark Bibliographic Tools Bibliographic and Citation Tools Bibliographic Explorer Toggle Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?) Connected Papers Toggle Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?) Litmaps Toggle Litmaps (What is Litmaps?) scite.ai Toggle scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?) Code, Data, Media Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article alphaXiv Toggle alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?) Links to Code Toggle CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?) DagsHub Toggle DagsHub (What is DagsHub?) GotitPub Toggle Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?) Huggingface Toggle Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?) ScienceCast Toggle ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?) Demos Demos Replicate Toggle Replicate (What is Replicate?) Spaces Toggle Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?) Spaces Toggle TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?) Related Papers Recommenders and Search Tools Link to Influence Flower Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?) Core recommender toggle CORE Recommender (What is CORE?) Author Venue Institution Topic About arXivLabs arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website. Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them. Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs. Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

来源报道 · 1 篇 · 以下链接均前往原始媒体

← 返回精选动态 原文

更多内容