Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40858663›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Investigating toxicity and Bias in stable diffusion text-to-image models.

Matthias Schneider, Thilo Hagendorff

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Matthias SchneiderHasso-Plattner Institute, University of Potsdam , Potsdam, Germany. matthias.schneider@student.hpi.uni-potsdam.de.
Thilo HagendorffInterchange Forum for Reflecting on Intelligent Systems, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Text-to-image models are increasingly popular and impactful, yet concerns regarding their safety and fairness remain. This study investigates the ability of ten popular Stable Diffusion models to generate harmful images, including sexual, violent, and personally sensitive material. We demonstrate that these models respond to harmful prompts by generating inappropriate content, which frequently displays troubling biases, such as the disproportionate portrayal of Black individuals in violent contexts. Our findings demonstrate a complete lack of any refusal behavior or safety measures in the models observed. We emphasize the importance of addressing this issue as image generation technologies continue to become more accessible and incorporated into everyday applications.

Indexed as

BiasGenerative Artificial IntelligenceSoftwareFemaleHumansMaleRace FactorsViolenceAI safetyBiasGenerative AIHarmful contentImage generationStable diffusionToxicity

Identifiers

PMID40858663
PMCPMC12381170

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.