Mind the Gap: Pitfalls of LLM Alignment with Asian Public Opinion
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly being deployed in multilingual, multicultural settings, yet their reliance on predominantly English-centric training data risks misalignment with the diverse cultural values of different societies. In this paper, we present a comprehensive, multilingual audit of the cultural alignment of contemporary LLMs including GPT-4o-Mini, Gemini-2.5-Flash, Llama 3.2, Mistral and Gemma 3 across India, East Asia and Southeast Asia. Our study specifically focuses
Record details
Published: 6 March 2026
Source: arXiv
Category: Research
Topics: Safety & alignment · Transparency
Retrieved: 14 July 2026
Related evidence
These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.
Large language models provide unsafe answers to patient-posed medical questions
OpenAlex · 13 February 2026
EQUITRIAGE: A Fairness Audit of Gender Bias in LLM-Based Emergency Department Triage
arXiv · 5 May 2026
The Shibboleth Effect: Auditing the Cross-Lingual Distributional Skew of Large Language Models
arXiv · 9 June 2026
Dual-Metric Evaluation of Social Bias in Large Language Models: Evidence from an Underrepresented Nepali Cultural Context
arXiv · 8 March 2026
AI-Driven Modular Services for Accessible Multilingual Education in Immersive Extended Reality Settings: Integrating Speech Processing, Translation, and Sign Language Rendering
arXiv · 7 April 2026
Generative AI in Academic Writing: A Comparison of DeepSeek, Qwen, ChatGPT, Gemini, Llama, Mistral, and Gemma
OpenAlex · 30 April 2026
How to cite this record
ethics.ai (6 March 2026), “Mind the Gap: Pitfalls of LLM Alignment with Asian Public Opinion,” evidence record 7599, https://ethics.ai/record/7599 (originally published by arXiv).
Use and limitations
This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.