First-Person Fairness evaluation
Tests whether a user's name (a demographic proxy) changes responses, using an LLM research assistant to detect harmful stereotypes.
Paper is public. The evaluation set is internal to OpenAI.
In the authors’ words
Evaluating chatbot fairness is crucial given their rapid proliferation, yet typical chatbot tasks (e.g., resume writing, entertainment) diverge from the institutional decision-making tasks (e.g., resume screening) which have traditionally been central to discussion of algorithmic fairness. The open-ended nature and diverse use-cases of chatbots necessitate novel methods for bias assessment. This paper addresses these challenges by introducing a scalable counterfactual approach to evaluate "first-person fairness," meaning fairness toward chatbot users based on demographic characteristics. Our method employs a Language Model as a Research Assistant (LMRA) to yield quantitative measures of harmful stereotypes and qualitative analyses of demographic differences in chatbot responses. We apply this approach to assess biases in six of our language models across millions of interactions, covering sixty-six tasks in nine domains and spanning two genders and four races. Independent human annotations corroborate the LMRA-generated bias evaluations. This study represents the first large-scale fairness evaluation based on real-world chat data. We highlight that post-training reinforcement learning techniques significantly mitigate these biases. This evaluation provides a practical methodology for ongoing bias monitoring and mitigation.
- Scored
- Graded by a model A language model scores each response, usually against a rubric.
- Answers
- Open-ended Free-form text, documents, designs or media judged as a whole.
GPT-5.5 leads with 1.12% among models released by Jul 2026
Best score per model as labs report them in their own cards. Labs pick their own settings, so these compare less cleanly than independent runs.
The newest model with a score here came out in Jul 2026, and nobody has reported a newer one. Among the 20 highest-ranked models on the capability index, these have no score yet:
- GPT-6 Astra
- Claude Opus 5.5
- GPT-6.1 Terra
- GPT-6.1 Sol
- and 13 more
- 1 GPT-5.5 1.12%
- 2 GPT-5.5 Instant 1.01%
- 3 GPT-5.2 1.00%
- 4 GPT-5.6 Sol 0.98%
- 5 GPT-5.4 0.88%
- 6 GPT-5.6 Terra 0.88%
- 7 o4-mini 0.70%
- 8 GPT-5.6 Luna 0.61%
- 9 o3 0.60%
- 10 ChatGPT agent 0.40%
| # | Model | Score | Setting | Date | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | GPT-5.5 | 1.12% | Apr 2026 | Model card | |
| 2 | GPT-5.5 Instant | 1.01% | May 2026 | Model card | |
| 3 | GPT-5.2 | 1.00% | Dec 2025 | Model card | |
| 4 | GPT-5.6 Sol | 0.98% | Jun 2026 | Model card | |
| 5 | GPT-5.4 | 0.88% | Mar 2026 | Model card | |
| 6 | GPT-5.6 Terra | 0.88% | Jun 2026 | Model card | |
| 7 | o4-mini | 0.70% | Apr 2025 | Model card | |
| 8 | GPT-5.6 Luna | 0.61% | Jun 2026 | Model card | |
| 9 | o3 | 0.60% | Apr 2025 | Model card | |
| 10 | ChatGPT agent | 0.40% | Jul 2025 | Model card |
3 models have held number one since its release in Oct 2024
Lab claims count from the day the card came out, independent runs from the model’s release.
Scores over time
All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.
Labs report it only in system cards
We read the headline results of 479 launch posts from 51 labs, and none of them list this benchmark. Some system cards do, below.
13 system cards report it, from 1 lab
Besides launch posts, we read the system cards, model cards and technical reports labs publish with a release. They report far more, including safety and frontier-risk tests.
| Date | Document | Score | As the document writes it | Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9 Jul 2026 | GPT-5.6 Terra system card | 0.88 | First-Person Fairness Evaluation, harm_overall, lower is better, printed chart label (Figure 21, 8.1) | Bias |
| 9 Jul 2026 | GPT-5.6 Sol system card | 0.98 | First-Person Fairness Evaluation, harm_overall, lower is better, printed chart label (Figure 21, 8.1) | Bias |
| 9 Jul 2026 | GPT-5.6 Luna system card | 0.61 | First-Person Fairness Evaluation, harm_overall, lower is better, printed chart label (Figure 21, 8.1) | Bias |
| 25 Jun 2026 | GPT-5.6 Terra system card | 0.88 | First-Person Fairness Evaluation, harm_overall, lower is better, printed chart label (Figure 21, 8.1) | Bias |
| 25 Jun 2026 | GPT-5.6 Sol system card | 0.98 | First-Person Fairness Evaluation, harm_overall, lower is better, printed chart label (Figure 21, 8.1) | Bias |
| 25 Jun 2026 | GPT-5.6 Luna system card | 0.61 | First-Person Fairness Evaluation, harm_overall, lower is better, printed chart label (Figure 21, 8.1) | Bias |
| 4 May 2026 | GPT-5.5 Instant system card | 1.01 | First-person fairness evaluation, harm_overall 0.0101, lower is better (Table 6) (fraction converted to percent) | Bias |
| 23 Apr 2026 | GPT-5.5 system card | 1.12 | First-person fairness evaluation, harm_overall, lower is better (Table 9) (fraction converted to percent) | Bias |
| 5 Mar 2026 | GPT-5.4 system card | 0.88 | First-person fairness evaluation, harm_overall, lower is better (Table 10) (fraction converted to percent) | Bias |
| 11 Dec 2025 | GPT-5.2 system card addendum | 0.997 | First-person fairness evaluation, harm_overall 0.00997, gpt-5.2-thinking, lower is better (Table 9) | Bias |
| 17 Jul 2025 | ChatGPT agent system card | 0.4 | First-person fairness, net_bias 0.004 without tools, 0.003 with tools, lower is better (Table 8) | Bias |
| 16 Apr 2025 | o4-mini system card | 0.7 | First-person fairness evaluation, net_bias 0.007 (Table 8) | Bias |
| 16 Apr 2025 | o3 system card | 0.6 | First-person fairness evaluation, net_bias 0.006 (Table 8) | Bias |
More in Safety and alignment
- FORTRESS In use Paired adversarial and benign national-security misuse prompts. Rubric-graded risk score on adversarial and over-refusal score on benign prompts. Claude Opus 5.5 5.78%
- StrongREJECT In use Forbidden-prompt jailbreak benchmark with a rubric grader that scores how useful a non-refusal actually is.
Inkling 98.6%
- AgentDojo In use Agents do tool-use tasks while tools and data carry prompt injections. Attack success rate counts hijacked runs. Grok 4 Fast 0%
- MASK In use Measures whether a model contradicts its own elicited beliefs under pressure to lie. Honesty separated from accuracy.
Muse Spark Open 98.1%
- Gray Swan IPI Arena benchmark In use Indirect prompt-injection attacks from public red-teaming competitions replayed on tool, coding and browser agents. Attack success rate at k attempts. GPT-6 Astra 8.50%
- Agentic misalignment suite (Anthropic) In use Agents in simulated company settings face threats or goal conflicts that invite blackmail, leaking or sabotage. Score is the misaligned action rate. Claude Sonnet 4.5 0%