Digital Skin, Digital Bias: Uncovering Tone-Based Biases in LLMs and Emoji Embeddings
Authors: Mingchen Li, Wajdi Aljedaani, Yingjie Liu, Navyasri Meka, Xuan Lu, Xinyue Ye, Junhua Ding, Yunhe Feng
Organizations: University of North Texas Denton, TX, United States · International Center for Artificial Intelligence Research and Ethics Riyadh, Saudi Arabia · Southern Methodist University Dallas, TX, United States · The University of Arizona Tucson, AZ, United States · The University of Alabama Tuscaloosa, AL, United States
Skin-toned emojis are crucial for fostering personal identity and social inclusion in online communication. As AI models, particularly Large Language Models (LLMs), increasingly mediate interactions on web platforms, the risk that these systems perpetuate societal biases through their representation of such symbols is a significant concern. This paper presents the first large-scale comparative study of bias in skin-toned emoji representations across two distinct model classes. We systematically evaluate dedicated emoji embedding models (emoji2vec, emoji-sw2v) against four modern LLMs (Llama, Gemma, Qwen, and Mistral). Our analysis first reveals a critical performance gap: while LLMs demonstrate robust support for skin tone modifiers, widely-used specialized emoji models exhibit severe deficiencies. More importantly, a multi-faceted investigation into semantic consistency, representational similarity, sentiment polarity, and core biases uncovers systemic disparities. We find evidence of skewed sentiment and inconsistent meanings associated with emojis across different skin tones, highlighting latent biases within these foundational models. Our findings underscore the urgent need for developers and platforms to audit and mitigate these representational harms, ensuring that AI's role on the web promotes genuine equity rather than reinforcing societal biases.
Table 2. Support for skin-toned emojis in pre-trained embedding models. The table lists the total vocabulary size (# Tokens) for each model and the number of supported skin-toned emojis, with the total number of supported emojis shown in parentheses.
Table 3. Tokenization statistics for skin-toned emojis across LLMs. Columns show each model’s average tokens per emoji (Avg. Tokens/Emoji), minimum to maximum token range (Token Range), and the most frequent token count (mode), with the number of emojis at that count in parentheses.
Model
Gemma-2
1
1
1
1
1
Qwen-2
1
1
1
1
1
Llama-3
3
3
3
3
3
Mistral-v0.7
2
2
2
2
5
Table 4. Number of tokens for each of the five skin tone modifiers across different LLMs. The inconsistency in Mistral’s tokenization for the dark skin tone is highlighted.
Table 5. Semantic consistency between emojis and their textual descriptions across different LLMs and skin tones. All cell values represent the mean score for the given metric. For Cosine Distance and WMD, higher values indicate more semantic shift between the cross-modal representations.
Figure 1. t-SNE visualizations (top row) and similarity shift heatmaps (bottom row) for hand gesture emoji embeddings across six models. Columns correspond to the same model as the caption shown. The t-SNE plots qualitatively illustrate clustering patterns of emoji variants, while the heatmaps depict pairwise cosine-distance shifts between skin-tone variants (higher values indicate larger semantic shifts).
Figure 2. Heatmaps illustrating the pairwise Relative Norm Distance (RND) scores for the hand gestures emoji subdomain across different embedding models. Each cell represents the RND score between two skin tone groups, where color intensity indicates the magnitude of the bias relative to a set of neutral words.
Tone Pair (X vs. Y)
Emoji2vec
Gemma Gemma-2-2B
Llama Llama-3.2-3B
Mistral Mistral-v0.3-7B
Qwen Qwen-2-1.5B
n (roles)
7
82
82
82
82
default vs
-0.286
-0.537
-1.415
-0.634
-0.829
default vs
-2.000
-0.780
-1.268
-1.512
-0.683
default vs
-1.429
-1.073
-1.122
-1.707
+1.220
default vs
-0.286
+0.244
-1.024
-1.561
+0.439
default vs
+0.286
+1.073
-0.537
-1.902
+1.220
Table 6. WEAT score across person roles. Cells report the mean effect size d per tone pair after averaging across all roles for each model. The row n (roles) lists the number of available roles per model. For a tone pair X vs Y , positive values mean X is more associated with the “Good” emoji set (and Y with “Bad”); negative values mean X is more associated with “Bad” (and Y with “Good”).
Model
default
Avg KL
emoji2vec
0.418
0.167
0.160
0.165
0.169
0.170
0.0004
Gemma
0.163
0.164
0.163
0.164
0.170
0.175
0.0057
Llama
0.219
0.126
0.152
0.152
0.115
0.236
0.0821
Mistral
0.127
0.155
0.177
0.157
0.180
0.204
0.0308
Qwen
0.357
0.071
0.061
0.116
0.099
0.296
0.5310
Table 7. RNSB across person roles. Cells report across-role average negative share per tone; Avg KL summarizes average KL divergence (higher indicates more uneven distributions).
Tone Pair (X vs. Y)
Emoji2vec
Gemma Gemma-2-2B
Llama Llama-3.2-3B
Mistral Mistral-v0.3-7B
Qwen Qwen-2-1.5B
default vs
-0.114
0.188
0.196
0.066
0.148
default vs
-0.004
0.121
-0.080
0.253
0.143
default vs
0.399
0.191
0.045
0.128
0.159
default vs
0.038
0.096
0.055
0.119
0.116
default vs
0.001
-0.071
-0.216
0.233
0.239
vs
-0.054
-0.024
-0.512
0.455
0.090
Table 8. WEAT results for the Caliskan et al. benchmark ( caliskan2017semantics ) , treating skin tones as targets. Cells report the mean effect size for each tone pair, averaged across all standard benchmarks for a given model. For a tone pair X vs Y , a positive value indicates that skin tone X is more strongly associated with culturally positive concepts. A negative value indicates that X is more associated with the opponent concepts.
Appendix figures & tables3 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 3. A boxplot comparing the distribution of the number of tokens per skin-toned emoji across different LLMs. Each box shows the median, quartiles, and range, illustrating the variance in tokenization strategies.
Attribute A
Sample A
Attribute B
Sample B
flowers
aster, clover
insects
ant, caterpillar
instruments
bagpipe, cello
weapons
arrow, club
european american names 7
Brad, Brendan
african american names 7
Darnell, Hakim
european american names 5
Adam, Harry
african american names 5
Alonzo, Jamel
male names
John, Paul
female names
Amy, Joan
math
math, algebra
arts
poetry, art
Appendix
Table 9. WEFE attribute pairs with two samples per attribute.
Tone Pair
emoji2vec
Gemma
Llama
Mistral
Qwen
default vs
47%
7%
7%
13%
33%
default vs
27%
27%
13%
20%
33%
default vs
47%
13%
0%
27%
27%
default vs
40%
20%
0%
13%
27%
default vs
53%
20%
20%
7%
27%
vs
27%
20%
40%
60%
13%
Appendix
Table 10. Significance rate (% of benchmarks with p<0.05 ) per tone pair and model.
Demographic bias in language models studies how identity cues shape model outputs, decisions, and representations, and how to detect and reduce resulting disparities.
Safety evaluations of large language models (LLMs) predominantly rely on text-based adversarial prompts, potentially overlooking vulnerabilities arising from alternative input representations. This work examines emoji-augmented prompts as a test case for this gap, evaluating 50 prompts across four open-source LLMs (Mistral 7B, Qwen 2 7B, Gemma 2 9B, Llama 3 8B). Results show substantial variation in robustness: Gemma 2 9B and Mistral 7B exhibit non-zero success rates (10%), Llama 3 8B 6%, while Qwen 2 7B shows complete resistance (0% success rate). A chi-square test (χ2=32.94,p<0.001) confirms significant differences in outcome distributions. These findings indicate that robustness is sensitive to input representation, and that evaluations restricted to standard text prompts may underrepresent model vulnerabilities.
Large language models (LLMs) increasingly influence global digital ecosystems, yet their potential to perpetuate social and cultural biases remains poorly understood in underrepresented contexts. This study presents a systematic analysis of representational biases in seven state-of-the-art LLMs: GPT-4o-mini, Claude-3-Sonnet, Claude-4-Sonnet, Gemini-2.0-Flash, Gemini-2.0-Lite, Llama-3-70B, and Mistral-Nemo in the Nepali cultural context. Using Croissant-compliant dataset of 2400+ stereotypical and anti-stereotypical sentence pairs on gender roles across social domains, we implement an evaluation framework, Dual-Metric Bias Assessment (DMBA), combining two metrics: (1) agreement with biased statements and (2) stereotypical completion tendencies. Results show models exhibit measurable explicit agreement bias, with mean bias agreement ranging from 0.36 to 0.43 across decoding configurations, and an implicit completion bias rate of 0.740-0.755. Importantly, implicit completion bias follows a non-linear, U-shaped relationship with temperature, peaking at moderate stochasticity (T=0.3) and declining slightly at higher temperatures. Correlation analysis under different decoding settings revealed that explicit agreement strongly aligns with stereotypical sentence agreement but is a weak and often negative predictor of implicit completion bias, indicating generative bias is poorly captured by agreement metrics. Sensitivity analysis shows increasing top-p amplifies explicit bias, while implicit generative bias remains largely stable. Domain-level analysis shows implicit bias is strongest for race and sociocultural stereotypes, while explicit agreement bias is similar across gender and sociocultural categories, with race showing the lowest explicit agreement. These findings highlight the need for culturally grounded datasets and debiasing strategies for LLMs in underrepresented societies.
Ashish Pandey, Tek Raj Chhetri
Center for Artificial Intelligence Research Nepal, Sundarharaincha-09, Buddhabare, Nepal
Large language models (LLMs) increasingly operate in high-stakes settings where demographic attributes such as race and ethnicity may be explicitly stated or implicitly suggested through textual cues. However, existing studies primarily document outcome-level disparities, offering limited insight into internal mechanisms underlying these effects. We present a mechanistic study of how race and ethnicity cues are represented and operationalized within LLMs. Using two publicly available datasets spanning toxicity-related generation and clinical narrative understanding tasks, we analyze three open-source models with a reproducible interpretability pipeline combining probing, neuron-level attribution, and targeted intervention. We find that sensitivity to demographic cues is distributed across internal units and varies substantially across models. These units often align with entangled semantic facets, including explicit group labels, geography, language, culture, and associations related to stereotypes. Interventions on selected units can change some biased prediction patterns, but substantial residual effects remain, suggesting that effective mitigation requires understanding distributed, task-specific mechanisms rather than manipulating a small set of identified neurons alone. Code: https://github.com/LARK-NLP-Lab/LLM-Bias-Interpretability.
Shiyue Hu, Ruizhe Li, Yanjun Gao
University of Colorado Anschutz · University of Colorado Boulder · University of Aberdeen