Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

Pride and Prejudice: LLM Amplifies Self-Bias in Self-Refinement

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2402.11436 v2 pith:OKH46CST submitted 2024-02-18 cs.CL cs.AI

classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords self-biastasksbiasllmsamplifiesgenerationmodelperformance
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Recent studies show that large language models (LLMs) improve their performance through self-feedback on certain tasks while degrade on others. We discovered that such a contrary is due to LLM's bias in evaluating their own output. In this paper, we formally define LLM's self-bias - the tendency to favor its own generation - using two statistics. We analyze six LLMs (GPT-4, GPT-3.5, Gemini, LLaMA2, Mixtral and DeepSeek) on translation, constrained text generation, and mathematical reasoning tasks. We find that self-bias is prevalent in all examined LLMs across multiple languages and tasks. Our analysis reveals that while the self-refine pipeline improves the fluency and understandability of model outputs, it further amplifies self-bias. To mitigate such biases, we discover that larger model size and external feedback with accurate assessment can significantly reduce bias in the self-refine pipeline, leading to actual performance improvement in downstream tasks. The code and data are released at https://github.com/xu1998hz/llm_self_bias.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Self-Preference Bias in Rubric-Based Evaluation of Large Language Models

    cs.CL 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

    Self-preference bias persists in rubric-based LLM evaluation even with fully objective, programmatically verifiable rubrics, and can shift subjective medical-chat scores by up to ~10 points.

  2. Measuring AI Alignment with Human Flourishing

    cs.AI 2025-07 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    The authors propose the Flourishing AI Benchmark, which uses 1,229 objective and subjective questions plus LLM judges to score 28 chatbots across seven dimensions of human flourishing, and find none reach the 90-point...

  3. AI Reasoning for Wireless Communications and Networking: A Survey and Perspectives

    cs.NI 2025-09 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A survey that organizes LLM and AI reasoning methods into a taxonomy and maps them onto the physical, link, network, transport, and application layers of wireless networks.

  4. Beyond the Surface: Measuring Self-Preference in LLM Judgments

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    The DBG metric measures LLM self-preference bias as the gap between a judge model's own win rate and the win rate assigned by an ensemble of gold judges.

Pith tools