arXiv subjects

Aditya Vashistha

Publications and source records attributed to Aditya Vashistha.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Toward Cultural Alignment: Human-Centered Evaluation of Multimodal AI Stories Across Five African Communities

In this paper, we examine how well AI-generated multimodal stories align with the lived practices, relationships, language, values, and visual expectations of the communities they represent. We conduct a community-grounded mixed-methods evaluation with 19 culture representatives across five African communities, combining quantitative annotations with qualitative focus group discussions. We find that cultural alignment depends not simply on recognizable cultural markers, but on how those markers fit social, linguistic, procedural, and visual context. From these evaluations, we develop a taxonomy of cultural alignment comprising five broader cultural marker categories and eight recurring mechanisms of misalignment. We additionally evaluate five multimodal LLM judges to examine whether automated evaluation can approximate community-grounded judgments at scale. Judge reliability and score calibration vary substantially across communities, with no single judge performing consistently across all five settings. These findings motivate community-calibrated evaluation pipelines in which automated judges are validated against community judgments to determine where they can be trusted and where human review remains necessary.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Trade-offs in Social-Norm Framings for Health Chatbots: Balancing Trust and Preference

AI-driven chatbots are increasingly being used to support community health workers (CHWs) in developing regions. Yet little is known about how cultural frameworks in chatbot design shape trust in collectivist contexts where decisions are rarely made in isolation. This paper examines how CHWs in rural India responded to chatbot-interfaces that delivered identical health content but varied in one specific cultural lever: social norms. Through a mixed-methods study with 61 ASHAs who compared four normative framings: neutral, descriptive, narrative identity, and injunctive authority, we (1) analyze how framings influence preferences and trust and (2) compare effects in low- and high-ambiguity scenarios. The results show that narrative framings were most preferred but encouraged overreliance, while authority framings were least preferred yet supported calibrated trust. We conclude with design recommendations for dynamic framing strategies that adapt to context and argue for calibrated trust--following correct advice and resisting incorrect advice--as a critical evaluation metric for safe, culturally-grounded AI.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

Creating Group Rules with AI: Human-AI Collaboration in WhatsApp Moderation

WhatsApp is one of the most widely used messaging platforms globally, with billions of users sharing information in private groups. Yet, it offers little infrastructure to support moderation and group governance. In the absence of platform-level oversight, group admins bear the responsibility of governing group behavior. In this paper, we explore how WhatsApp group admins collaborate with AI tools to create, enforce, and maintain group rules. Drawing on a two-phase speculative design study with 20 admins in India, we examine how participants interacted with an AI assistant (Meta AI) to co-create rules and responded to a series of probes illustrating AI-assisted moderation features. Our findings show that while admins appreciated the AI's ability to surface overlooked rules and reduce their moderation burden, they were highly sensitive to issues of relational trust, data privacy, tone, and social context. We identify how group type and admin style shaped their willingness to delegate authority, and surface the limitations of current chatbot interfaces in supporting collaborative rule-making. We conclude with design implications for building moderation tools that center human judgment, relational nuance, contextual adaptability, and collective governance.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

PLURAL: A Global Dataset for Value Alignment

Large language models (LLMs) are used worldwide, yet disproportionately reflect Western values, limiting their ability to represent diverse value systems. We introduce PLURAL, a large-scale, value-focused preference dataset grounded in the Integrated Values Survey (IVS), a nationally representative survey spanning 92 countries. Using a two-stage generation pipeline, we transform survey responses into synthetic preference triplets that preserve normative value signals while producing realistic scenarios. We release an initial version of PLURAL containing ~500,000 preference triplets representing people in 20 diverse countries. We evaluate PLURAL in three ways: (i) dataset-level validation showing that it preserves both cross-country value differences and within-country diversity from the original survey; (ii) automated evaluation showing that training on PLURAL improves alignment with target countries' cultural profiles, reducing mean absolute error by up to 27.7% relative to strong baselines; and (iii) blind human evaluation with 176 evaluators in India, Brazil, and Japan, who judge PLURAL-aligned responses as more representative of their national values. Together, these results show that PLURAL contains learnable signal for value steering, offering a scalable resource for pluralistic alignment. Dataset: https://huggingface.co/datasets/agdhruv/plural-alignment

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Computational Hermeneutics: Evaluating generative AI as a cultural technology

Generative AI systems are increasingly recognized as cultural technologies, yet current evaluation frameworks often treat culture as a variable to be measured rather than fundamental to the system's operation. Drawing on hermeneutic theory from the humanities, we argue that GenAI systems function as "context machines" that must inherently address three interpretive challenges: situatedness (meaning only emerges in context), plurality (multiple valid interpretations coexist), and ambiguity (interpretations naturally conflict). We present computational hermeneutics as an emerging framework offering an interpretive account of what GenAI systems do, and how they might do it better. We offer three principles for hermeneutic evaluation -- that benchmarks should be iterative, not one-off; include people, not just machines; and measure cultural context, not just model output. This perspective offers a nascent paradigm for designing and evaluating contemporary AI systems: shifting from standardized questions about accuracy to contextual ones about meaning.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Shiksha Copilot: Teacher-AI Collaboration for Curating and Customizing Lesson Plans in Low-Resource Schools

This study investigates Shiksha copilot, an AI-assisted lesson planning tool deployed in government schools across Karnataka, India. The system combined LLMs and human expertise through a structured process in which English and Kannada lesson plans were co-created by curators and AI; teachers then further customized these curated plans for their classrooms using their own expertise alongside AI support. Drawing on a large-scale mixed-methods study involving 1,043 teachers and 23 curators, we examine how educators collaborate with AI to generate context-sensitive lesson plans, assess the quality of AI-generated content, and analyze shifts in teaching practices within multilingual, low-resource environments. Our findings show that teachers used Shiksha copilot both to meet administrative documentation needs and to support their teaching. The tool eased bureaucratic workload, reduced lesson planning time, and lowered teaching-related stress, while promoting a shift toward activity-based pedagogy. However, systemic challenges such as staffing shortages and administrative demands constrained broader pedagogical change. We frame these findings through the lenses of teacher-AI collaboration and communities of practice to examine the effective integration of AI tools in teaching. Finally, we propose design directions for future teacher-centered EdTech, particularly in multilingual and Global South contexts.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2026

Designing Culturally Aligned AI Systems For Social Good in Non-Western Contexts

AI technologies are increasingly deployed in high-stakes domains such as education, healthcare, law, and agriculture to address complex challenges in non-Western contexts. This paper examines eight real-world deployments spanning seven countries and 18 languages, combining 17 interviews with AI developers and domain experts with secondary research. Our findings identify six cross-cutting factors - Language, Institution, Safety, Task, End-User Demography, and Domain - that structured how systems were designed and deployed. These factors were shaped by Sociocultural (diversity, practices), Institutional (resources, policies), and Technological (capabilities, limits) influences. We find that building effective AI systems required extensive collaboration between AI developers and domain experts, with human resources proving more critical to achieving safe and effective outcomes in high-stakes domains than technological expertise alone. Additionally, we present 12 guidelines synthesizing these dynamics for designing AI for social good systems that are culturally grounded, equitable, and responsive to the needs of non-Western contexts.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

TALES: A Taxonomy and Analysis of Cultural Representations in LLM-generated Stories

Millions of users across the globe turn to AI chatbots for their creative needs, inviting widespread interest in understanding how they represent diverse cultures. However, evaluating cultural representations in open-ended tasks remains challenging and underexplored. In this work, we present TALES, an evaluation of cultural misrepresentations in LLM-generated stories for diverse Indian cultural identities. First, we develop TALES-Tax, a taxonomy of cultural misrepresentations by collating insights from participants with lived experiences in India through focus groups (N=9) and individual surveys (N=15). Using TALES-Tax, we evaluate 6 models through a large-scale annotation study spanning 2925 annotations from 108 annotators with lived experience and native language proficiency from across 71 regions in India and 14 languages. Concerningly, we find that 88% of the generated stories contain misrepresentations, and such errors are more prevalent in mid- and low-resourced languages and stories based in peri-urban regions in India. We also transform the annotations into TALES-QA, a standalone question bank to evaluate the cultural knowledge of models.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2026

Fluent but Foreign: Even Regional LLMs Lack Cultural Alignment

Large language models (LLMs) are used worldwide, yet exhibit Western cultural tendencies. Many countries are now building ``regional'' or ``sovereign'' LLMs, but it remains unclear whether they reflect local values and practices or merely speak local languages. Using India as a case study, we evaluate six Indic and six global LLMs on two dimensions -- values and practices -- grounded in nationally representative surveys and community-sourced QA datasets. Across tasks, Indic models do not align better with Indian norms than global models; in fact, a U.S. respondent is a closer proxy for Indian values than any Indic model. We further run a user study with 115 Indian users and find that writing suggestions from both global and Indic LLMs introduce Westernized or exoticized writing. Prompting and regional fine-tuning fail to recover alignment and can even degrade existing knowledge. We attribute this to scarce culturally grounded data, especially for pretraining. We position cultural evaluation as a first-class requirement alongside multilingual benchmarks and offer a reusable, community-grounded methodology. We call for native, community-authored corpora and thickxwide evaluations to build truly sovereign LLMs.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

LLMs Homogenize Values in Constructive Arguments on Value-Laden Topics

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to promote prosocial and constructive discourse online. Yet little is known about how these models negotiate and shape underlying values when reframing people's arguments on value-laden topics. We conducted experiments with 465 participants from India and the United States, who wrote comments on homophobic and Islamophobic threads, and reviewed human-written and LLM-rewritten constructive versions of these comments. Our analysis shows that LLM systematically diminishes Conservative values while elevating prosocial values such as Benevolence and Universalism. When these comments were read by others, participants opposing same-sex marriage or Islam found human-written comments more aligned with their values, whereas those supportive of these communities found LLM-rewritten versions more aligned with their values. These findings suggest that value homogenization in LLM-mediated prosocial discourse runs the risk of marginalizing conservative viewpoints on value-laden topics and may inadvertently shape the dynamics of online discourse.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2025

Personalizing Prostate Cancer Education for Patients Using an EHR-Integrated LLM Agent

Cancer patients often lack timely education and personalized support due to clinician workload. This quality improvement study develops and evaluates a Large Language Model (LLM) agent, MedEduChat, which is integrated with the clinic's electronic health records (EHR) and designed to enhance prostate cancer patient education. Fifteen non-metastatic prostate cancer patients and three clinicians recruited from the Mayo Clinic interacted with the agent between May 2024 and April 2025. Findings showed that MedEduChat has a high usability score (UMUX 83.7 out of 100) and improves patients' health confidence (Health Confidence Score rose from 9.9 to 13.9). Clinicians evaluated the patient-chat interaction history and rated MedEduChat as highly correct (2.9 out of 3), complete (2.7 out of 3), and safe (2.7 out of 3), with moderate personalization (2.3 out of 3). This study highlights the potential of LLM agents to improve patient engagement and health education.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2025

ABLEIST: Intersectional Disability Bias in LLM-Generated Hiring Scenarios

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly under scrutiny for perpetuating identity-based discrimination in high-stakes domains such as hiring, particularly against people with disabilities (PwD). However, existing research remains largely Western-centric, overlooking how intersecting forms of marginalization--such as gender and caste--shape experiences of PwD in the Global South. We conduct a comprehensive audit of six LLMs across 2,820 hiring scenarios spanning diverse disability, gender, nationality, and caste profiles. To capture subtle intersectional harms and biases, we introduce ABLEIST (Ableism, Inspiration, Superhumanization, and Tokenism), a set of five ableism-specific and three intersectional harm metrics grounded in disability studies literature. Our results reveal significant increases in ABLEIST harms towards disabled candidates--harms that many state-of-the-art models failed to detect. These harms were further amplified by sharp increases in intersectional harms (e.g., Tokenism) for gender and caste-marginalized disabled candidates, highlighting critical blind spots in current safety tools and the need for intersectional safety evaluations of frontier models in high-stakes domains like hiring.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Think Outside the Data: Colonial Biases and Systemic Issues in Automated Moderation Pipelines for Low-Resource Languages

Most social media users come from the Global South, where harmful content usually appears in local languages. Yet, AI-driven moderation systems struggle with low-resource languages spoken in these regions. Through semi-structured interviews with 22 AI experts working on harmful content detection in four low-resource languages: Tamil (South Asia), Swahili (East Africa), Maghrebi Arabic (North Africa), and Quechua (South America)--we examine systemic issues in building automated moderation tools for these languages. Our findings reveal that beyond data scarcity, socio-political factors such as tech companies' monopoly on user data and lack of investment in moderation for low-profit Global South markets exacerbate historic inequities. Even if more data were available, the English-centric and data-intensive design of language models and preprocessing techniques overlooks the need to design for morphologically complex, linguistically diverse, and code-mixed languages. We argue these limitations are not just technical gaps caused by "data scarcity" but reflect structural inequities, rooted in colonial suppression of non-Western languages. We discuss multi-stakeholder approaches to strengthen local research capacity, democratize data access, and support language-aware solutions to improve automated moderation for low-resource languages.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Examining Human-AI Collaboration for Co-Writing Constructive Comments Online

This paper examines if large language models (LLMs) can help people write constructive comments on divisive social issues due to the difficulty of expressing constructive disagreement online. Through controlled experiments with 600 participants from India and the US, who reviewed and wrote constructive comments on threads related to Islamophobia and homophobia, we observed potential misalignment between how LLMs and humans perceive constructiveness in online comments. While the LLM was more likely to prioritize politeness and balance among contrasting viewpoints when evaluating constructiveness, participants emphasized logic and facts more than the LLM did. Despite these differences, participants rated both LLM-generated and human-AI co-written comments as significantly more constructive than those written independently by humans. Our analysis also revealed that LLM-generated comments integrated significantly more linguistic features of constructiveness compared to human-written comments. When participants used LLMs to refine their comments, the resulting comments were more constructive, more positive, less toxic, and retained the original intent. However, occasionally LLMs distorted people's original views -- especially when their stances were not outright polarizing. Based on these findings, we discuss ethical and design considerations in using LLMs to facilitate constructive discourse online.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2025

Disability Across Cultures: A Human-Centered Audit of Ableism in Western and Indic LLMs

People with disabilities (PwD) experience disproportionately high levels of discrimination and hate online, particularly in India, where entrenched stigma and limited resources intensify these challenges. Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to identify and mitigate online hate, yet most research on online ableism focuses on Western audiences with Western AI models. Are these models adequately equipped to recognize ableist harm in non-Western places like India? Do localized, Indic language models perform better? To investigate, we adopted and translated a publicly available ableist speech dataset to Hindi, and prompted eight LLMs--four developed in the U.S. (GPT-4, Gemini, Claude, Llama) and four in India (Krutrim, Nanda, Gajendra, Airavata)--to score and explain ableism. In parallel, we recruited 175 PwD from both the U.S. and India to perform the same task, revealing stark differences between groups. Western LLMs consistently overestimated ableist harm, while Indic LLMs underestimated it. Even more concerning, all LLMs were more tolerant of ableism when it was expressed in Hindi and asserted Western framings of ableist harm. In contrast, Indian PwD interpreted harm through intention, relationality, and resilience--emphasizing a desire to inform and educate perpetrators. This work provides groundwork for global, inclusive standards of ableism, demonstrating the need to center local disability experiences in the design and evaluation of AI systems.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

How Deep Is Representational Bias in LLMs? The Cases of Caste and Religion

Representational bias in large language models (LLMs) has predominantly been measured through single-response interactions and has focused on Global North-centric identities like race and gender. We expand on that research by conducting a systematic audit of GPT-4 Turbo to reveal how deeply encoded representational biases are and how they extend to less-explored dimensions of identity. We prompt GPT-4 Turbo to generate over 7,200 stories about significant life events (such as weddings) in India, using prompts designed to encourage diversity to varying extents. Comparing the diversity of religious and caste representation in the outputs against the actual population distribution in India as recorded in census data, we quantify the presence and "stickiness" of representational bias in the LLM for religion and caste. We find that GPT-4 responses consistently overrepresent culturally dominant groups far beyond their statistical representation, despite prompts intended to encourage representational diversity. Our findings also suggest that representational bias in LLMs has a winner-take-all quality that is more biased than the likely distribution bias in their training data, and repeated prompt-based nudges have limited and inconsistent efficacy in dislodging these biases. These results suggest that diversifying training data alone may not be sufficient to correct LLM bias, highlighting the need for more fundamental changes in model development. Dataset and Codebook: https://github.com/agrimaseth/How-Deep-Is-Representational-Bias-in-LLMs

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

"Cold, Calculated, and Condescending": How AI Identifies and Explains Ableism Compared to Disabled People

People with disabilities (PwD) regularly encounter ableist hate and microaggressions online. These spaces are generally moderated by machine learning models, but little is known about how effectively AI models identify ableist speech and how well their judgments align with PwD. To investigate this, we curated a first-of-its-kind dataset of 200 social media comments targeted towards PwD, and prompted state-of-the art AI models (i.e., Toxicity Classifiers, LLMs) to score toxicity and ableism for each comment, and explain their reasoning. Then, we recruited 190 participants to similarly rate and explain the harm, and evaluate LLM explanations. Our mixed-methods analysis highlighted a major disconnect: AI underestimated toxicity compared to PwD ratings, while its ableism assessments were sporadic and varied. Although LLMs identified some biases, its explanations were flawed--they lacked nuance, made incorrect assumptions, and appeared judgmental instead of educational. Going forward, we discuss challenges and opportunities in designing moderation systems for ableism, and advocate for the involvement of intersectional disabled perspectives in AI.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2025

ASHABot: An LLM-Powered Chatbot to Support the Informational Needs of Community Health Workers

Community health workers (CHWs) provide last-mile healthcare services but face challenges due to limited medical knowledge and training. This paper describes the design, deployment, and evaluation of ASHABot, an LLM-powered, experts-in-the-loop, WhatsApp-based chatbot to address the information needs of CHWs in India. Through interviews with CHWs and their supervisors and log analysis, we examine factors affecting their engagement with ASHABot, and ASHABot's role in addressing CHWs' informational needs. We found that ASHABot provided a private channel for CHWs to ask rudimentary and sensitive questions they hesitated to ask supervisors. CHWs trusted the information they received on ASHABot and treated it as an authoritative resource. CHWs' supervisors expanded their knowledge by contributing answers to questions ASHABot failed to answer, but were concerned about demands on their workload and increased accountability. We emphasize positioning LLMs as supplemental fallible resources within the community healthcare ecosystem, instead of as replacements for supervisor support.

cs.HC↗