Browse FSI scholarship on geopolitics, global health, energy, cybersecurity and more.
Featured Publications
Security Through Cooperation: Space, Nuclear Weapons, and U.S.-Russia Relations after the Cold War
Rose Gottemoeller uses lessons learned from U.S.-Russia relations during the George H. W. Bush and Clinton administrations to offer insights into how Russia today may be convinced to end its war against Ukraine and resume cooperation for the sake of global security.
Autocrats vs. Democrats: China, Russia, America, and the New Global Disorder
A clear-eyed look from Michael McFaul at how the rise of autocratic China and Russia are compelling some to think that we have entered a new Cold War—and why we must reject that thinking in order to prevail.
The National College Entrance Examination shapes the future of millions of students in China each year, but Hongbin Li and Ruixue Jia illuminate how this test of all tests is also shaping education, labor markets, political legitimacy, and social values beyond the PRC.
Marcella Alsan, an SHP courtesy faculty members, writes in this STAT opinion piece that mental illness and addiction can be curbed with proper funding.
There is an urgent need for stronger congressional leadership in cyber policy, especially when it comes to countering China’s persistent, aggressive intrusions.
Private equity (PE) firms have increasingly influenced U.S. health care, posing risks to health equity—the idea that everyone should have a fair opportunity for optimal health. While PE investors claim to improve efficiency, raise capital, and leverage economies of scale, evidence indicates that their involvement often leads to reduced access to affordable high-quality care, particularly for rural populations, older adults, low-income communities, and marginalized racial and ethnic groups. Without strong regulation and enforcement, PE practices are likely to continue transforming health care in ways that could harm patients and burden clinicians.
A growing body of research on large language models (LLMs) has identified various biases, primarily in contexts where biases reflect societal patterns. This article focuses on a different source of bias in LLMs—government censorship. By comparing foundation models developed in China and those from outside China, we find substantially higher rates of refusal to respond, shorter responses, and inaccurate responses to a battery of 145 political questions in China-originating models. These disparities diminish for less-sensitive prompts, showing that technological and market differences cannot fully explain this divergence. While all models exhibit higher refusal to respond rates with Chinese-language prompts than English ones, language differences are less pronounced than disparities between China-originating and non-China-originating models. We caution that our study is observational and cross-sectional and does not establish a causal linkage between regulatory pressures and censorship behaviors of China-originating LLMs, but these results suggest that censorship through government regulation requiring companies to restrict political content may be an important factor contributing to political bias in LLMs.
