YOUR RESEARCH, IN SIGHT

让下一篇重要论文，不再错过。

覆盖计算机全学科，以 AI 为快捷入口。关注方向、作者和关键词，把发现变成持续的研究积累。

采集已暂停

正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+0新增论文

+0其中 AI 相关

+0已有论文修订

+0新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描：等待完成 · 全站最近入库：2026-11-02 00:39各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-03 19:05 — 2026-11-04 19:05（北京时间） · 点击数字查看对应简报；AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查：尚未完成最近发现新增版本：2026-11-02 00:39库内论文最新更新时间：2026-10-30 01:59

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常；新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

8,677 已收录论文7,675 AI 相关1,866 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

研究日报 / 周报 →按信源浏览 →

时间范围跟随排序：版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。

找到 2 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序等待首次采集

版本更新 · v3arXiv:2505.13565

Trustworthy AI and Democracy: A Dual Taxonomy and Operational Framework of Democratic Risks and Contributions

Oier Mentxaka, Natalia Díaz-Rodríguez, Mark Coeckelbergh, Marcos López de Prado, Emilia Gómez, David Fernández Llorca, Enrique Herrera-Viedma, Francisco Herrera

Artificial Intelligence (AI) can undermine and strengthen democratic governance. This paper introduces the AIRD/AIPD framework, a dual taxonomy and operational framework for analyzing AI's democratic risks and conditional contributions. The AI Risks to Democracy (AIRD) taxonomy identifies threats to autonomy, fairness, public discourse, democratic institutions, and trust, while the AI's Positive Contributions to Democracy (AIPD) taxonomy captures AI's potential to enhance efficiency, accessibility, security, informed citizenry, transparency and accountability, inclusive democratic dialogue, and evidence-based policymaking. Grounded in five democratic principles and the seven Trustworthy AI requirements proposed by the European Commission's High-Level Expert Group on AI, the framework connects democratic goals with governance and design mechanisms. It provides an operational process for identifying affected contexts and actors, classifying primary and secondary AIRD/AIPD effects, mapping them to relevant Trustworthy AI requirements, and defining proportionate governance responses and responsible actors. An operational mapping and two worked examples illustrate its application to electoral misinformation and AI-assisted public service allocation. The analysis highlights the transversal relevance of transparency, accountability, fairness, and societal wellbeing, while recognizing trade-offs, implementation costs, differential impacts, institutional capacity, and contextual variation across democratic settings. The framework is conceptual and has not been empirically validated, but it offers a traceable and adaptable basis for research, policy analysis, institutional oversight, and responsible AI design. By connecting democratic diagnosis with governance action, it bridges the gap between normative principles and the operational requirements of trustworthy and democratically legitimate AI.

尚无 AI 解读，展示原文摘要

cs.CY · cs.AI · cs.HC更新于 2026-10-29

arXiv ↗PDF ↗

新论文 · v1arXiv:2610.37962

Statistical Detection of Positional Bias in LLM-Based Recommender Systems: Methodologies and Empirical Evidence

Carlos Peláez-González, Francisco Herrera, Andrés Herrera-Poyatos

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used as recommendation generators in conversational recommender systems (RS) via retrieval-augmented generation (RAG). This flexible design introduces new sources of structural bias. This paper studies positional bias in top-1 and single-turn LLM-based RS: systematic dependence of the recommended item on the order in which candidates are presented in the prompt. We propose two complementary detection methodologies: (i) POB-ICM, based on contingency matrix analysis and Chi-square independence testing, and (ii) POB-UNBP, a sample-efficient approach derived from a uniformity null model under permutation-based evaluation, enabling stochastic decoding with formal statistical guarantees. Using a controlled RAG testbed for product recommendation, built on a real product catalog, a fixed prompt template and 2000 template-generated user queries with 20 permutations each (40,000 instances), both methodologies reject the null hypothesis of positional independence and uniformity in all evaluated state-of-the-art models. We introduce three complementary metrics -- permutation sensitivity, positional bias, and strong positional bias -- to quantify this effect, the latter targeting cases where the position displaces the recommendation towards clearly less relevant items rather than only choosing among comparably relevant ones. A robustness analysis across candidate-set size and decoding temperature shows that the bias is structural and model-dependent, not an artifact of deterministic decoding or candidate-set size. These results establish positional bias as a measurable, reproducible property of prompt-mediated recommendation pipelines in the evaluated setting and motivate routine auditing and governance controls (e.g., order randomization, standardized prompting) for deployed LLM-based RS. Source code is publicly released.

尚无 AI 解读，展示原文摘要

cs.IR · cs.AI更新于 2026-10-28

arXiv ↗PDF ↗