法律 AI // 资讯总览
需要被持续追踪的
法律 AI 信号。
本期索引按监管、判例、实务与研究归档;可依主题或关键字定位已发布记录。
法律 AI // 资讯总览
本期索引按监管、判例、实务与研究归档;可依主题或关键字定位已发布记录。
原题: User Perceptions vs. Proxy LLM Judges: Privacy and Helpfulness in LLM Responses to Privacy-Sensitive Scenarios
一项发表于arXiv的研究(编号2510.20721v4)对LLM在隐私敏感场景下的回复质量进行了用户中心评估。研究团队以PrivacyLens的90个真实场景开展用户研究(n=94),要求用户评估LLM回复的有用性与隐私保护质量。结果显示,用户对相同LLM回复的评判彼此一致性很低,而五个代理LLM评判之间虽高度一致,但与用户评分相关性均较低。这表明代理LLM无法准确估计用户在隐私敏感场景中对实用性与隐私的多样化感知,研究者呼吁开展更多以用户为中心的评估研究。
展示来源全文,完整内容以原文页面为准。
arXiv:2510.20721v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are rapidly being adopted for tasks like drafting emails, summarizing meetings, and answering health questions. In these settings, users may need to share private information (e.g., contact details, health records). To evaluate LLMs' ability to identify and redact such information, prior work introduced real-life, scenario-based benchmarks (e.g., ConfAIde, PrivacyLens) and found that LLMs can leak private information in complex scenarios. However, these evaluations relied on proxy LLMs to judge the helpfulness and privacy-preservation quality of LLM responses, rather than directly measuring users' perceptions. To understand how users perceive the helpfulness and privacy-preservation quality of LLM responses to privacy-sensitive scenarios, we conducted a user study ($n=94$) using 90 PrivacyLens scenarios. We found that users had low agreement with each other when evaluating identical LLM responses. In contrast, five proxy LLMs reached high agreement, yet each proxy LLM had low correlation with users' evaluations. These results indicate that proxy LLMs cannot accurately estimate users' wide range of perceptions of utility and privacy in privacy-sensitive scenarios. We discuss the need for more user-centered studies to measure LLMs' ability to help users while preserving privacy, and for improving alignment between LLMs and users in estimating perceived privacy and utility.
以代理LLM作为隐私与有用性评判标准可能失真,影响LLM隐私保护能力的合规评估与问责依据。
文书与研报规范引注
《用户感知与代理LLM评判在隐私敏感场景中的分歧研究》(来源: arXiv cs.CL,发布日期: 2026/09/14,访问链接: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.20721)