这篇论文用四个LLM当裁判，比较了Grok写的百科和维基百科的政治中立性，结果发现Grok版也不中立，甚至更偏，还各有倾向。
一项大规模政治偏见研究分析了1394对政府官员条目，使用Grok、Claude、Mistral和DeepSeek四个LLM裁判评估Grokipedia与Wikipedia的中立性。结果显示所有LLM裁判均认为Grokipedia中立性低于Wikipedia。Grokipedia明显偏向经济右翼政治家，而Wikipedia则偏向社会自由派。研究表明LLM撰写的百科并未实现更高中立性，反而嵌入不同意识形态。
Grokipedia vs Wikipedia: An LLM-Based Audit of Political Neutrality along Ideologies
Online encyclopedias shape political opinion and, through it, democratic discourse. In late 2025, Grokipedia was released, an encyclopedia written entirely by the LLM Grok. One motivation behind the project was to provide an unbiased alternative to Wikipedia, which has faced accusations of "left-wing" and "liberal" bias. But does an encyclopedia written by an LLM deliver greater neutrality, or does it simply embed a different ideology? We conduct a large-scale political bias study on Grokipedia and Wikipedia, analysing 1,394 article pairs describing members of government for neutrality along nine expert-coded ideology dimensions employing four LLM judges, Grok, Claude, Mistral, and DeepSeek. As the LLMs could themselves be biased, we also investigate patterns in their judgments. We find all LLM-judges, including Grok, to rate Grokipedia less neutral than Wikipedia. Both encyclopedias are rated as portraying politicians favourably overall, but towards different ideological groups. Grokipedia particularly favours economically right-wing politicians and penalises socially liberal ones, while Wikipedia is rated as favourably biased towards the latter.