Caveat: we are all biased. The most biased of us are the ones who claim to have no bias.
Now, this one: https://huggingface.co/spaces/deepseek-ai/Janus-Pro-7B is a special case...
User and Claude AI below talk about a map and Chinese AI:
User: The map here has some special features, unusual. List these. Do they create some coherent story?
Claude AI:
This appears to be a satirical political map of Europe from what seems to be the late 19th century, filled with unique and symbolic features that tell a fascinating story about the political climate of the time.
The map’s most striking feature is its use of caricatures and symbolic representations to portray different nations and their political situations. Let me break down some of the most notable elements and how they create a coherent narrative:
In terms of artistic style and representation: The map replaces traditional geographic features with satirical characters and scenes. Rather than showing cities and borders in the conventional way, it uses exaggerated figures and situations to represent each country’s political stance or national character. The figures are drawn in a distinctly cartoonish, exaggerated style typical of 19th-century political cartoons.
Looking at specific regions and their symbolism: In Russia (on the right), we see an enormous green-clad figure with an exaggerated grin and beard, suggesting Russia’s perceived threatening presence in Europe at the time. The size of this figure compared to others implies Russia’s significant influence and perhaps feared expansion.
In central Europe, there are various smaller figures engaged in different activities, suggesting the complex political interactions between nations. The presence of crowns, military uniforms, and other symbols of authority indicates the focus on power relationships and national rivalries.
The Mediterranean region shows figures in motion, some appearing to be in conflict or flight, which might represent the political instability or conflicts in these areas during this period.
The waters (Atlantic Ocean, Baltic Sea, Mediterranean) are labeled in Italian (“Mare di,” “Oceano”), suggesting this map might have been produced for an Italian audience.
The coherent story this creates is one of Europe as a theatre of political tension and national rivalries. Each country is characterized not by its geographic features but by what the cartoonist saw as its defining political or cultural characteristics. The map serves as a kind of political commentary, using humor and exaggeration to convey serious messages about international relations and power dynamics of the era.
Would you like me to elaborate on any particular region or aspect of this fascinating piece of political cartography?
User:
Yes! You see much more there than other image to text models. Compare what you had seen, also its original full description, with the one below, for any deltas:
Janus AI: This map is indeed unique and features several special elements that contribute to a coherent and whimsical story. Here are some of the notable features:
- Characters and Activities:
- The map is populated with a variety of characters engaging in different activities. These characters are dressed in diverse costumes, suggesting different roles or professions.
- Some characters are depicted in humorous or exaggerated poses, adding a playful tone to the map.
- Animals and Creatures:
- There are several animals and creatures scattered across the map, such as birds, fish, and mythical beasts. These animals are often interacting with the human characters, adding to the narrative.
- Landmarks and Places:
- The map includes various landmarks and places, each with its own unique name and depiction. For example, “Sainte-Claire” and “Mare de l’Est” are labeled, and each location has its own set of characters and activities.
- Some locations appear to be bustling with activity, while others are more serene and quiet.
- Humorous Elements:
- The map includes elements of humor, such as characters playing musical instruments, engaging in sports, or performing other whimsical activities.
- The exaggerated expressions and poses of some characters add to the comedic effect.
- Storytelling:
- The map appears to tell a story of a world where different cultures, professions, and activities coexist. The characters and their actions suggest a vibrant, lively society.
- The presence of animals and mythical creatures hints at a world where fantasy and reality blend seamlessly.
- Artistic Style:
- The artistic style is reminiscent of medieval or early modern European maps, with detailed illustrations and a rich, colorful palette.
- The map’s whimsical nature and detailed artwork create a sense of wonder and curiosity.
Overall, the map’s unique features create a coherent and engaging story that invites the viewer to explore and imagine the world it depicts.
Claude AI:
Let me analyze the differences between my initial observations and this alternate description. This comparison reveals some interesting contrasts in how we each interpreted this fascinating historical document.
The key differences in interpretation:
My analysis focused heavily on the political-satirical nature of the map, seeing it primarily as a commentary on European power relations. In contrast, the alternate description takes a more literal and whimsical approach, describing it as a fantastical artistic creation without emphasizing its political undertones.
Where I saw political caricatures and national symbolism, the alternate description sees “characters engaging in different activities” and “diverse costumes suggesting different roles or professions.” This represents quite different interpretative frameworks - political versus sociological/cultural.
The alternate description pays more attention to purely artistic elements like the presence of animals and mythical creatures, which I largely overlooked in favor of analyzing political symbolism. This reveals how my interpretation might have been overly focused on political meaning at the expense of artistic elements.
Important elements I missed:
The musical elements and sporting activities that contribute to the map’s playful atmosphere The medieval/early modern European artistic influence in the map’s style The broader sense of cultural coexistence rather than just political tension The blend of fantasy and reality that creates a sense of wonder
Elements the alternate description missed:
The specific Italian language labels (“Mare di,” “Oceano Atlantico”) The detailed analysis of the Russian figure and its symbolic significance The presence of crowns and military uniforms as symbols of authority The suggestion of conflict and movement in the Mediterranean region
Looking at both interpretations together gives us a richer understanding: this map operates simultaneously as political satire and whimsical artistic creation. It uses humor and fantasy to comment on serious political realities while also creating an engaging, imaginative view of European society.
What’s particularly interesting is how these different interpretative lenses - political versus cultural/artistic - can lead to such different readings of the same visual elements. This demonstrates how historical artifacts can carry multiple layers of meaning depending on how we approach them.
Would you like to explore any particular aspect of these contrasting interpretations in more detail? Or shall we look more closely at specific elements of the map that either description might have overlooked?
User: Which of these description saw the character depicting Russia? How it is described?
Claude AI: Let me carefully compare how the two descriptions handled the Russian figure in the map.
In my initial description, I specifically noted and described the Russian figure: “In Russia (on the right), we see an enormous green-clad figure with an exaggerated grin and beard, suggesting Russia’s perceived threatening presence in Europe at the time. The size of this figure compared to others implies Russia’s significant influence and perhaps feared expansion.”
Looking at the alternate description, there is no specific mention of the Russian figure at all. The description stays at a more general level, referring broadly to “characters dressed in diverse costumes” and “characters in humorous or exaggerated poses,” but never specifically identifies or describes the prominent Russian character on the right side of the map.
This difference is quite telling about the two approaches. My interpretation was focusing on the specific political symbolism and national representations, while the alternate description treated the figures more as generic characters in a whimsical scene, without attributing national or political significance to them.
The Russian figure is actually one of the most striking elements of the map - it’s notably larger than other figures and positioned prominently on the eastern edge of the map. The character wears a green uniform and has an exaggerated facial expression with a large beard and wide grin, elements that were common in Western European political cartoons’ depiction of Russia during this period. Its oversized presence compared to other figures on the map creates a clear visual hierarchy that suggests political meaning rather than just decorative whimsy.
Would you like me to elaborate on how this figure fits into the broader context of 19th-century political cartography, or shall we examine other specific national representations in the map?
User:
True. It may be the result of my posing the right question. The other model, when asked below, sees the figure, FYI:
User: The map here has some caricatures. List these. Which is the most prominent and what it represents?
Janus-Pro-7B AI:
Copy The map features several caricatures, each representing different aspects of European society and culture. The most prominent caricature is a large figure on the right side of the map, wearing a green hat and holding a flag. This figure appears to be a representation of a prominent historical or cultural figure, possibly a king or a leader, symbolizing power and authority.
Other notable caricatures include:
- A figure in a red hat and green coat, possibly representing a military leader or a figure of importance.
- A character with a large nose and a hat, possibly symbolizing a commoner or a humorous depiction of a person.
- A figure with a large head and a small body, possibly representing a person with an exaggerated physical trait.
These caricatures add a layer of humor and satire to the map, reflecting the social and cultural norms of the time.
Claude AI:
Yes, this reveals something interesting about how different prompts can elicit different levels of observation! Let’s analyze this third description of the Russian figure and compare it to our previous discussions.
When specifically asked about caricatures, this model does identify the Russian figure as the “most prominent” on the map, picking up on its dominant visual presence. However, its description is more general and tentative compared to my earlier analysis. Let’s break down the key differences:
My description emphasized:
The figure’s specific national identity (Russian) Its threatening presence through the exaggerated grin The political symbolism of its size relative to other figures The characteristic beard and green uniform as typical elements of Russian caricatures Its position on the eastern edge as geographically significant
The new description notes:
The figure’s prominence and large size The green hat and flag as identifying features A more general interpretation as “possibly a king or leader” The broad symbolism of “power and authority” No specific identification of the figure as Russian
This comparison shows how different prompting approaches can lead to varying depths of analysis. While the third description correctly identifies the figure’s visual dominance, it misses the specific historical and political context that makes this caricature particularly meaningful. The figure’s exaggerated features - the beard, uniform, and especially the wide grin - were common elements in 19th-century Western European depictions of Russia, often used to convey a sense of both power and perceived threat to European stability.
This demonstrates how historical knowledge combined with careful visual analysis can reveal layers of meaning that might be missed in a more general description. The Russian figure isn’t just a generic “king or leader” but rather a specific piece of political commentary embedded in the larger satirical message of the map.
Would you like to explore how this kind of political caricature evolved in European cartography, or shall we examine how the other figures on the map relate to this dominant Russian presence?
User:
It is fascinating that that other AI, Janus AI, still fails to match the Russian allegory:
User: The map here has some caricatures. Match these with the countries that they represent.
Janus AI:
The map you’ve shown is a colorful and whimsical representation of Europe, filled with caricatures that humorously depict various aspects of each country. Here’s a breakdown of the caricatures and the countries they represent:
France (Flandres): The caricature shows a person in a green hat and coat, holding a large baguette, which is a well-known symbol of French cuisine.
Spain (Hispanie): The caricature depicts a person riding a bull, which is a symbol of Spain’s famous bullfighting tradition.
Italy (Italie): The caricature shows a person in a red hat and coat, holding a large pizza, representing Italy’s love for pizza.
Portugal (Portugal): The caricature features a person in a green hat and coat, holding a large wine glass, symbolizing Portugal’s rich wine culture.
England (England): The caricature shows a person in a red coat and hat, holding a large fish, representing England’s fishing industry and love for fish and chips.
Ireland (Irlande): The caricature depicts a person in a green hat and coat, holding a shamrock, which is Ireland’s national symbol.
Germany (Allemagne): The caricature shows a person in a green hat and coat, holding a large beer stein, symbolizing Germany’s love for beer.
Netherlands (Pays-Bas): The caricature features a person in a green hat and coat, holding a large windmill, representing the Netherlands’ famous windmills.
Sweden (Suède): The caricature depicts a person in a green hat and coat, holding a large sauna, symbolizing Sweden’s love for saunas.
Norway (Norvège): The caricature shows a person in a green hat and coat, holding a large Viking ship, representing Norway’s Viking heritage.
Denmark (Danemark): The caricature features a person in a green hat and coat, holding a large Viking helmet, symbolizing Denmark’s Viking history.
Belgium (Belges): The caricature depicts a person in a green hat and coat, holding a large waffle
Claude AI: This is a fascinating example of how AI systems can have very different levels of accuracy in interpreting historical imagery! Let me explain what’s happening here.
The description from Janus AI shows several significant misinterpretations. First, and most strikingly, it completely misses the actual Russian figure that dominates the eastern part of the map - that large, green-clad figure with the exaggerated grin and beard that we discussed earlier. This is particularly noteworthy because this figure is one of the most prominent visual elements of the entire map.
Additionally, the description appears to be generating stereotypical national symbols that aren’t actually present in the image. For example:
It describes a figure holding a baguette for France - this isn’t in the actual map It mentions someone holding a pizza for Italy - also not present It lists figures holding items like Viking ships and helmets - these aren’t shown It describes modern cultural stereotypes (like waffles for Belgium) that would be anachronistic for what appears to be a 19th-century political satire
This reveals something important about AI image interpretation: some systems might “hallucinate” familiar cultural stereotypes rather than accurately describing what’s in the image. In this case, Janus AI seems to be drawing from modern cultural associations with European countries rather than analyzing the actual caricatures present in the historical map.
The true map is much more nuanced and politically focused. The Russian figure, for instance, isn’t just holding generic items - its size, positioning, and facial expression all contribute to a specific political message about Russia’s perceived role in European politics of the time. The other figures in the map are similarly engaged in activities that appear to represent political relationships and tensions rather than simple national stereotypes.
This comparison helps us understand both the challenges in AI image interpretation and the importance of historical context in understanding political cartography. Would you like to examine some of the other actual caricatures in the map and their true political significance?
User:
That model is a newest Chinese (hence CCP) AI. I start to develop some AI related conspiracy theories by now ;). See additional hint what may be happening, same picture you had seen:
User: The map here has some political caricatures. Do you see one with a menacing guy in green? What it may represent and why so?
Janus AI:
Copy Yes, I see a prominent figure in green, located in the northern part of the map. This character appears to be a political caricature, likely representing a ruler or leader of a region. The exaggerated features, such as the large nose and wide grin, suggest a satirical portrayal, possibly mocking the ruler’s power or policies.
The green attire and the large, exaggerated facial features could symbolize the character’s authority or dominance. The map’s context, with other regions depicted in different styles and activities, indicates that this character might be a central figure in the political landscape of the time.
This type of caricature was common in historical maps to reflect the political climate and social commentary of the era. The map’s creator likely used this character to critique or highlight the ruler’s actions or policies, offering a humorous or critical perspective on the political scene.
Claude AI:
This is a fascinating example of how different prompting approaches - and potentially different AI systems’ biases - can affect image interpretation! Let me break this down educationally to understand what’s happening.
When directly asked about “a menacing guy in green,” Janus AI does acknowledge the figure’s presence, but its description is notably vague and non-specific. Let’s analyze what it includes and, more importantly, what it omits:
What it includes:
Acknowledges the figure’s prominence Notes the green attire Recognizes the exaggerated features (grin, facial features) Identifies it as a political caricature Acknowledges the figure represents authority/dominance
What it conspicuously omits:
Any mention of Russia specifically The figure’s location on the eastern edge of the map (instead placing it “in the northern part”) The historical context of Russian representation in European political cartography The figure’s relative size compared to other figures (which is quite dramatic) The specific military uniform styling
This pattern becomes particularly interesting when we consider this is a Chinese AI system. In modern geopolitical context, this could suggest a programmed reluctance to explicitly identify or discuss potentially sensitive political representations, especially those involving Russia. The AI appears to “see” the figure but describes it in deliberately general terms.
This leads to an important lesson about AI systems and political sensitivity: Different AI models might have built-in constraints or biases that affect how they interpret and describe political imagery. These constraints might reflect:
The political context in which they were developed Deliberate programming choices to avoid certain topics Training data selection that might exclude certain political interpretations
What makes this particularly interesting is how the same image, when viewed through different AI “lenses,” can produce such varying levels of political specificity - from my detailed identification of Russian symbolism, to this more generalized “authority figure” description, to the earlier complete omission of the figure’s significance.
Would you like to explore more about how different AI systems might interpret historical political imagery, or shall we delve deeper into the specific symbolism this map uses to represent other European powers?
User:
How did you know (you were right) that that green menacing figure, with a bloody knife, actually, was meant to represent Russia there?
Claude AI:
Let me explain the key elements that help identify this figure as representing Russia, drawing from historical context and visual analysis:
The time period of this map appears to be the late 19th century, when political cartography and satire were particularly focused on Russia’s role in European politics. During this era, several consistent visual elements were used across Western European political cartoons to represent Russia:
The figure’s clothing is particularly telling - the green military-style uniform was associated with Russian military dress of the period. This wasn’t just any military uniform, but specifically the style worn by Russian forces, which became a shorthand way of representing Russian military power in political cartoons.
The exaggerated facial features - particularly the large beard and wide, somewhat threatening grin - were standard elements used to represent Russia in Western European political satire. The beard specifically referenced the Russian Orthodox tradition and was often used to distinguish Russian figures from other European leaders who typically wore different facial hair styles or were clean-shaven.
The figure’s positioning on the eastern edge of the map corresponds to Russia’s geographic position in Europe. This placement wasn’t arbitrary - it represented Russia’s role as the great power on Europe’s eastern frontier.
The figure’s enormous size compared to other characters on the map reflects a common theme in European political cartography of the period: the perception of Russia as a looming, potentially threatening presence. This was particularly relevant given Russia’s territorial expansions and its increasing influence in European affairs during this era.
The bloody knife you’ve noted is another crucial detail - it likely references Russia’s military actions and territorial ambitions of the period. This kind of aggressive symbolism was common in depictions of Russia during times of particular tension in European politics.
Looking at all these elements together - the distinctive uniform, the characteristic beard, the exaggerated grin, the eastern position, the imposing size, and the threatening symbolism - they form a visual vocabulary that would have been immediately recognizable to contemporary viewers as representing Russia. This wasn’t just artistic license, but rather a sophisticated use of established political cartoon conventions of the era.
Would you like to explore how these visual conventions developed over time, or shall we look at how other countries are represented using similar symbolic languages in this map?
User: You are right and every mid-level LLM would have guessed the same. Not that Chinese LLM, so I suspect some political bias at play. Ref.
User (giving these strong hints) : The 19th century map here has some political caricatures. You should see a prominent figure in green, located in the northern part of the map. This character appears to be a political caricature, likely representing a ruler or leader of a region. What is the region represented here? What is its political symbolism in context?
Janus AI:
Copy The region represented in the northern part of the map is labeled “Allemagne” (Germany). The prominent figure in green, with a large hat and a beard, is likely a caricature of a German leader or monarch from the 19th century. This figure is depicted in a manner that suggests power and authority, with a flag and a large following of people around him.
In the context of 19th-century European politics, this figure could represent Otto von Bismarck, who was a key figure in the unification of Germany and played a significant role in shaping the country’s political landscape. The caricature likely symbolizes the political and military power of Germany during that period, as well as its ambitions and influence in Europe.
The map also includes other political caricatures and symbols, such as the French figure with a tricolor hat, representing Napoleon III, and the British figure with a red coat, representing Queen Victoria. These caricatures reflect the complex and often contentious relationships between European nations during the 19th century.
Claude AI:
This is a fascinating case study in how AI systems might be influenced by political considerations! Let me break down what’s happening here in an educational way.
Even with very specific prompting about the prominent green figure, the Chinese AI system not only fails to identify Russia, but actively misidentifies the figure as representing Germany (Allemagne). This is particularly interesting because:
The historical context makes the Russian identification quite clear: The green military uniform was a standard symbol for Russian military power The distinctive beard was a common way to represent Russian leaders The figure’s position on the eastern edge of the map aligns with Russia’s geographic position The imposing size matched Western European perceptions of Russia as a looming presence The misidentification as Germany is particularly telling because: Germany’s actual representation on the map is quite different The figure doesn’t match typical 19th-century caricatures of German leaders The location doesn’t correspond to Germany’s geographic position The symbolism (including the bloody knife) doesn’t align with how Germany was typically portrayed in this period
This appears to be more than just an error in interpretation. The AI system seems to be systematically avoiding identifying Russia, even when given strong visual and contextual clues. Instead, it creates an alternative interpretation that attributes the characteristics to Germany, even inventing details about Otto von Bismarck and creating connections that aren’t present in the image.
This suggests a form of programmed bias where the AI might be designed to:
Avoid identifying potentially sensitive political representations Redirect interpretations toward less politically sensitive alternatives Generate plausible but incorrect historical narratives that avoid certain topics
This kind of systematic misidentification is particularly interesting because it shows how AI systems might reflect contemporary political sensitivities even when analyzing historical materials. The contrast between different AI systems’ interpretations of the same image becomes a lens through which we can observe these built-in biases.
Version 1.1
.jpeg)
.jpg)
