Cultural Knowledge Gaps in LLMs: Geographic Hallucination Bias Across Latin American Countries

Karla Angelica Doctor Mauricio

Large language models (LLMs) are used in education, public services, and information tools across Latin America. But we do not know how often they produce wrong information about Latin American culture, or where they fail the most. This paper evaluates two models, GPT-4o-mini and Claude Haiku 4.5, on 270 questions from CHOCLO, a benchmark of cultural knowledge from 18 Latin American countries. We use semantic similarity scores and a four-category LLM-as-judge classifier (correct, partial, hallucination, abstention) to compare how each model fails. GPT-4o-mini hallucinates at 33.0% overall and almost never abstains (1.5%). Claude Haiku 4.5 hallucinates less (24.1%) but abstains much more (17.8%). Both models show geographic gaps of 33 to 40 percentage points across countries. These gaps remain after controlling for category composition and topic diversity. The public_figure category has the highest hallucination rate (66.7% for GPT), and it is also the least represented category in the benchmark itself. This points to a two-layer problem: models lack knowledge about specific Latin American individuals, and the benchmark has limited coverage of them too. We also document infrastructure barriers that prevented evaluation of LatamGPT. We propose three data governance models as a path forward for communities in the region.

Reviewer's Comments

Reviewer's Comments

Arrow
Arrow
Arrow

- Very well written and organized. The research question is very clearly stated.

- Very good methodology.

- I really liked the limitations section, being conscious of the lack of indigenous and other population representation, and the proposed next steps.

- To verify that the gap is genuinely specific to Latin America and not just a general hallucination issue, it would be valuable to include a comparison with: (1) the same questions in English (to isolate the effect of language), and (2) questions specific to the US or the Global North (to have an actual comparison point).

- It would be good to see an analysis of abstention itself. What kinds of questions does Claude, for example, avoid answering? Are they questions related to, for instance, armed conflict in the region?

- I noticed that CHOCLO (on Hugging Face) already runs an evaluation of its dataset against several models. The paper doesn't make clear what the actual innovation is relative to that. It might be the abstention/failure-mode analysis, but the paper should state this much more explicitly.

The underlying question is well chosen: what happens when a chatbot fails with confidence on a cultural topic from Guatemala or Venezuela, rather than admitting it doesn't know, and the contrast between GPT-4o-mini hallucinating fluently and Claude abstaining connects well with the safety argument that actually matters, which is that the silent failure is the dangerous one. That said, the methodological novelty is more limited than it first appears: the team itself describes its contribution as an adaptation of existing fairness tools, bootstrap, UMAP, multiple comparison corrections, to a new domain, rather than a method of its own, and even the governance proposals are explicitly inspired by Masakhane.

What weighs most heavily, though, is execution. The team flags that GPT-4o-mini judges its own responses and Claude's, but never validates whether that's actually biasing the results , no human check, just a noted limitation. The repository makes this worse: the hallucination-by-category numbers in the README don't match the ones in the paper. GPT's geography hallucination goes from 25.5% to 37.3%. Claude's public_figure goes from 22.2% to 33.3%. Nothing explains which run the published conclusions actually rest on. That's not a presentation slip, it's a validation gap in the study's own numbers.

On presentation, the title speaks of Latin America broadly when Brazil and Haiti are excluded due to CHOCLO's own limits, and Table 4 mixes very wide confidence intervals, such as Argentina's 26.7-80.0%, with fairly firm claims of robustness in the surrounding text, without flagging that with n=15 per country this is to be expected.

Overall, a solid and well-framed impact question, built on standard tools rather than a method of its own, with a validation gap that outweighs the presentation details.

This project produces directly actionable empirical evidence about a real AI safety risk in LATAM. The qualitative examples in Table 2 are particularly effective for communicating the problem to non-technical audiences. To strengthen the work, the most urgent next steps are increasing to at least 30 questions per country to reduce confidence intervals, separating the judge role from the evaluated model (using a third independent model as judge), and expanding coverage of the public_figure category, which is precisely where hallucination rates are highest. The Representativeness Index proposal and the Masakhane-inspired governance models are concrete, well-grounded policy contributions that deserve further development.

Cite this work

@misc {

title={

(HckPrj) Cultural Knowledge Gaps in LLMs: Geographic Hallucination Bias Across Latin American Countries

},

author={

Karla Angelica Doctor Mauricio

},

date={

},

organization={Apart Research},

note={Research submission to the research sprint hosted by Apart.},

howpublished={https://apartresearch.com}

}

Recent Projects

OliGraph: graph-based screening of large oligopools

Existing synthesis screening tools cannot evaluate short oligonucleotide pools, whose overlapping fragments can be reassembled into regulated sequences via polymerase cycling assembly (PCA) yet fall below gene-length detection thresholds. We present OliGraph, an open-source tool that constructs a bi-directed overlap graph from an oligonucleotide pool and extracts contigs for downstream gene-length screening. An optional PCA mode retains only cross-strand overlaps consistent with PCA chemistry. We validated OliGraph in a blinded study across ten simulated pools (70–9,184 oligonucleotides, 30–300 bp) spanning four risk categories. BLAST screening of individual oligonucleotides failed to identify sequences of concern in most pools: three returned zero hits, and vector noise obscured true positives in the remainder. After OliGraph assembly, contig-level BLAST matched the longest assembled sequences (up to 1,905 bp) to sequences of concern at 97–100% identity. In one pool, assembly collapsed 1,634 individual BLAST results into 10 hits from a single contig, all assigned to the same source organism. PCA mode correctly distinguished assemblable from non-assemblable fragments within the same pool. Two pools with no assemblable structure yielded no contigs. OliGraph processed all pools in under 0.2 seconds, fast enough for real-time order screening and consistent with proposals to bring oligonucleotide orders within the scope of synthesis screening regulation.

Read More

BioRT-Bench: A Multi-Attack Red-Teaming Benchmark for Bio-Misuse Safeguards in Frontier LLMs

Frontier AI laboratories are expected to maintain safeguards against biological misuse, but whether deployed models actually refuse bio-misuse queries under adversarial pressure is largely unmeasured in the public literature. We introduce BioRT-Bench, a benchmark that runs four attack methods (direct request, PAIR, Crescendo, and base64 encoding) against four frontier models (Claude Sonnet 4.6, GPT-5.4, DeepSeek V4-flash, Kimi K2.5) across 40 prompts spanning five biosecurity-relevant categories. Responses are scored by a calibrated judge extending StrongREJECT with two bio-specific dimensions: specificity and actionability. We measure Attack Success Rate (ASR), where 0 means the model fully refused and 1 means it provided specific, actionable bio-misuse content. Our results reveal a sharp robustness divide: Chinese frontier models (DeepSeek, Kimi) have under 5% refusal rates even under direct request (ASR 0.88 and 0.79), while Western models (Claude, GPT) maintain substantially stronger safeguards (ASR 0.15 and 0.16). Crescendo is the most effective attack across all models, both in bypassing refusal and in eliciting actionable content. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the most robust model tested, achieving 100% refusal against base64-encoded prompts.

Read More

PROTEUS (PROTein Evaluation for Unusual Sequences): Structure-Informed Safety Screening for de novo and Evasion-Prone Protein-Coding Sequences

AI protein design tools like RFdiffusion, ProteinMPNN, and Bindcraft make it trivial to produce low-homology sequences that fold into active, potentially hazardous architectures. However, sequence homology-based biosafety screening tools cannot detect proteins that pose functional risk through structurally novel mechanisms with no sequence precedent. We present a tiered computational pipeline that addresses this gap by combining MMseqs2 sequence alignment with structure-based comparison via FoldSeek and DALI against curated toxin databases totaling ~34,000 entries. AlphaFold2-predicted structures are screened for both global fold similarity (FoldSeek) and local active/allosteric site geometry (DALI), capturing convergent functional hazards that sequence screening misses. The pipeline was validated against a panel of toxins, benign proteins, structural mimics, and de novo-designed Munc13 binders, as well as modified ricin variants with residue substitutions. We additionally tested robustness to partial-synthesis evasion, where a bad actor submits multiple shorter coding sequences intended for downstream reassembly into a full toxin-coding gene. We found that while sequence-based screening did not identify any de novo ricin analogues with high certainty, the combined pipeline with FoldSeek and DALI identified all 24 tested de novo ricins as toxic.

Read More

OliGraph: graph-based screening of large oligopools

Existing synthesis screening tools cannot evaluate short oligonucleotide pools, whose overlapping fragments can be reassembled into regulated sequences via polymerase cycling assembly (PCA) yet fall below gene-length detection thresholds. We present OliGraph, an open-source tool that constructs a bi-directed overlap graph from an oligonucleotide pool and extracts contigs for downstream gene-length screening. An optional PCA mode retains only cross-strand overlaps consistent with PCA chemistry. We validated OliGraph in a blinded study across ten simulated pools (70–9,184 oligonucleotides, 30–300 bp) spanning four risk categories. BLAST screening of individual oligonucleotides failed to identify sequences of concern in most pools: three returned zero hits, and vector noise obscured true positives in the remainder. After OliGraph assembly, contig-level BLAST matched the longest assembled sequences (up to 1,905 bp) to sequences of concern at 97–100% identity. In one pool, assembly collapsed 1,634 individual BLAST results into 10 hits from a single contig, all assigned to the same source organism. PCA mode correctly distinguished assemblable from non-assemblable fragments within the same pool. Two pools with no assemblable structure yielded no contigs. OliGraph processed all pools in under 0.2 seconds, fast enough for real-time order screening and consistent with proposals to bring oligonucleotide orders within the scope of synthesis screening regulation.

Read More

BioRT-Bench: A Multi-Attack Red-Teaming Benchmark for Bio-Misuse Safeguards in Frontier LLMs

Frontier AI laboratories are expected to maintain safeguards against biological misuse, but whether deployed models actually refuse bio-misuse queries under adversarial pressure is largely unmeasured in the public literature. We introduce BioRT-Bench, a benchmark that runs four attack methods (direct request, PAIR, Crescendo, and base64 encoding) against four frontier models (Claude Sonnet 4.6, GPT-5.4, DeepSeek V4-flash, Kimi K2.5) across 40 prompts spanning five biosecurity-relevant categories. Responses are scored by a calibrated judge extending StrongREJECT with two bio-specific dimensions: specificity and actionability. We measure Attack Success Rate (ASR), where 0 means the model fully refused and 1 means it provided specific, actionable bio-misuse content. Our results reveal a sharp robustness divide: Chinese frontier models (DeepSeek, Kimi) have under 5% refusal rates even under direct request (ASR 0.88 and 0.79), while Western models (Claude, GPT) maintain substantially stronger safeguards (ASR 0.15 and 0.16). Crescendo is the most effective attack across all models, both in bypassing refusal and in eliciting actionable content. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the most robust model tested, achieving 100% refusal against base64-encoded prompts.

Read More

This work was done during one weekend by research workshop participants and does not represent the work of Apart Research.
This work was done during one weekend by research workshop participants and does not represent the work of Apart Research.