Large language models (LLMs) increasingly mediate decisions in domains where unfair treatment of demographic groups is unacceptable. Existing work probes when biased outputs appear, but gives little insight into the mechanisms that generate them, leaving existing mitigations largely fragile. In this paper, we conduct a systematic investigation of LLM unfairness and propose DiffHeads—a lightweight debiasing framework for LLMs. We first compare Direct-Answer (DA) prompting to Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting across eight representative open- and closed-source LLMs. DA will trigger the nature-bias component of the LLM and reduce measured unfairness by 391.9%- 534.5% in both one- and two-turn dialogues. Next, we define a token-to-head contribution score that traces each token’s influence back to individual attention heads. This reveals a small cluster of bias heads that activate under DA but stay largely dormant with CoT, providing the first causal link between prompting strategy and bias emergence. Finally, building on this insight, we propose DiffHeads, which identify bias heads through differential activation analysis between DA and CoT and selectively mask only those heads. DiffHeads reduces unfairness by 49.4%, and 40.3% under DA and CoT, respectively, without harming model utility.

The widespread availability of large-scale code datasets has accelerated the development of code large language models (CodeLLMs), raising concerns about unauthorized dataset usage. Dataset poisoning offers a proactive defense by reducing the utility of such unauthorized training. However, existing poisoning methods often require full-dataset poisoning and introduce transformations that break code compilability. In this paper, we introduce FunPoison, a functionality-preserving poisoning approach that injects short, compilable weak-use fragments into executed code paths. FunPoison leverages reusable statement-level templates with automatic repair and conservative safety checking to ensure side-effect freedom, while a type-aware synthesis module preserves type correctness, suppresses static-analysis warnings, and improves stealth. Extensive experiments across multiple CodeLLMs and code-generation benchmarks show that FunPoison achieves effective poisoning by contaminating only 10% of the dataset, while maintaining 100% compilability and functional correctness. FunPoison also remains robust against advanced code sanitization techniques, including detection, purification, rewriting, static-analysis, and formatting defenses.

The Model Context Protocol (MCP) enables large language models (LLMs) to access external resources on demand. While commonly assumed to enhance performance, how LLMs actually leverage this capability remains poorly understood. We introduce MCPGAUGE, the first comprehensive evaluation framework for probing LLM–MCP interactions along four key dimensions: proactivity (self-initiated tool use), compliance (adherence to tool-use instructions), effectiveness (task performance post-integration), and overhead (computational cost incurred). MCPGAUGE comprises a 160-prompt suite and 25 datasets spanning knowledge comprehension, general reasoning, and code generation. Our large-scale evaluation, spanning six commercial LLMs, 30 MCP tool suites, and both one- and two-turn interaction settings—comprises around 20,000 API calls and over USD 6,000 in computational cost. This comprehensive study reveals four key findings that challenge prevailing assumptions about the effectiveness of MCP integration. These insights highlight critical limitations in current AI–tool integration and position MCPGAUGE as a principled benchmark for advancing controllable, tool-augmented LLMs.