Prior research show that Large Language Models (LLMs) and Vision-Language Models (VLMs) represent marginalized groups more homogeneously than dominant groups. However, the mechanisms underlying this homogeneity bias remain relatively unexplored. We propose that this bias emerges from systematic differences in the probability distributions from which tokens are sampled at inference-time. Analyzing three measures of uncertainty in token sampling distributions-entropy, perplexity, and probability of differentiation-we find that in some models, specifically GPT-4 Turbo and Llama-3.2, tokens are sampled more deterministically when generating texts about marginalized groups (i.e., Black Americans and women) compared to their dominant group counterparts (i.e., White Americans and men). While these findings may help explain homogeneity bias in certain models, the patterns did not replicate across all VLMs tested, suggesting multiple mechanisms may contribute to homogeneity bias in AI.

Vision-Language Models trained on massive collections of human-generated data often reproduce and amplify societal stereotypes. One critical form of stereotyping reproduced by these models is homogeneity bias-the tendency to represent certain groups as more homogeneous than others. We investigate how this bias responds to hyperparameter adjustments in GPT-4, specifically examining sampling temperature and top p which control the randomness of model outputs. By generating stories about individuals from different racial and gender groups and comparing their similarities using vector representations, we assess both bias robustness and its relationship with hyperparameter values. We find that (1) homogeneity bias persists across most hyperparameter configurations, with Black Americans and women being represented more homogeneously than White Americans and men, (2) the relationship between hyperparameters and group representations shows unexpected non-linear patterns, particularly at extreme values, and (3) hyperparameter adjustments affect racial and gender homogeneity bias differently-while increasing temperature or decreasing top p can reduce racial homogeneity bias, these changes show different effects on gender homogeneity bias. Our findings suggest that while hyperparameter tuning may mitigate certain biases to some extent, it cannot serve as a universal solution for addressing homogeneity bias across different social group dimensions.

Homogeneity bias in Large Language Models (LLMs) refers to their tendency to homogenize the representations of some groups compared to others. Previous studies documenting this bias have predominantly used encoder models, which may have inadvertently introduced biases. To address this limitation, we prompted GPT-4 to generate single word/expression completions associated with 18 situation cues - specific, measurable elements of environments that influence how individuals perceive situations and compared the variability of these completions using probability of differentiation. This approach directly assessed homogeneity bias from the model's outputs, bypassing encoder models. Across five studies, we find that homogeneity bias is highly volatile across situation cues and writing prompts, suggesting that the bias observed in past work may reflect those within encoder models rather than LLMs. Furthermore, these results suggest that homogeneity bias in LLMs is brittle, as even minor and arbitrary changes in prompts can significantly alter the expression of biases. Future work should further explore how variations in syntactic features and topic choices in longer text generations influence homogeneity bias in LLMs.