对比人类与大模型对通用人工智能的情感，发现模型态度更积极且存在偏见。

As general-purpose artificial intelligence systems become increasingly integrated into society and are used for information seeking, content generation, problem solving, textual analysis, coding, and running processes, it is crucial to assess their long-term impact on humans. This research explores the sentiment of large language models (LLMs) and humans toward artificial general intelligence (AGI) using a Likert-scale survey. Seven LLMs, including GPT-4 and Bard, were analyzed and compared with sentiment data from three independent human sample populations. Temporal variations in sentiment were also evaluated over three consecutive days. The results show a diversity in sentiment scores among LLMs, ranging from 3.32 to 4.12 out of 5. GPT-4 recorded the most positive sentiment toward AGI, while Bard leaned toward a neutral sentiment. In contrast, the human samples showed a lower average sentiment of 2.97. The analysis outlines potential conflicts of interest and biases in the sentiment formation of LLMs, and indicates that LLMs could subtly influence societal perceptions. To address the need for regulatory oversight and culturally grounded assessments of AI systems, we introduce the Societal AI Alignment and Sentiment Benchmark (SAAS-AI), which leverages multidimensional prompts and empirically validated societal value frameworks to evaluate language model outputs across temporal, model, and multilingual axes. This benchmark is designed to guide policymakers and AI agencies, including within frameworks such as the EU AI Act, by providing robust, actionable insights into AI alignment with human values, public sentiment, and ethical norms at both national and international levels. Future research should further refine the operationalization of the SAAS-AI benchmark and systematically evaluate its effectiveness through comprehensive empirical testing.