跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

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。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+1030新增论文
+790其中 AI 相关
+128已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-12 05:56 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-11 22:47各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-11 06:36 — 2026-11-12 06:36(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:2026-11-12 05:56最近发现新增版本:2026-11-11 22:47库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-11 08:00

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。

21,673 已收录论文18,321 AI 相关6,056 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

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。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-12 05:55(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.10997

Open Problems in Chatbots and Mental Health

Jared Moore, Jacy Reese Anthis, William Agnew, Andrea Mock, Kevin Klyman, Sanmi Koyejo, Nick Haber, Stevie Chancellor 等 11 位作者

原文摘要

General-purpose chatbots are increasingly used for emotional and mental health support. They can be useful, but issues such as sycophancy, reinforcement of delusional beliefs, and poor crisis response create risks that are difficult for researchers to study and evaluate. In this paper, we review the most critical open problems for researchers and policymakers in the use of general-purpose chatbots and their effects on mental health. First, there are tractable problems in the controlled evaluation of chatbots: establishing the construct and ecological validity of evaluations, evaluating multi-turn interactions, and connecting evaluations to improvements in chatbot behavior. For example, conventional benchmarks that primarily rely on static datasets cannot establish chatbot safety, and novel simulation methods need validation. Second, researchers must connect their studies of chatbots and mental health to real-world evidence. This includes analyzing the chatbot products that AI companies and mental health practitioners have deployed, including their user interfaces and human review and escalation practices for user welfare concerns. However, clinical analysis opportunities afforded by real chat log data sharing are complicated by significant privacy concerns. Finally, we argue that researchers should take an active role in the construction and refinement of evidence-based policy through corporate and governmental decisions such as user protections, standards of care, protected access to user chat logs, data sharing between institutions, incident reporting, and post-deployment monitoring. Such behavioral evaluations, studies of real-world outcomes, and data governance depend on each other and must be addressed in tandem. We believe a coordinated research effort would have substantial real-world impact.

cs.CL · cs.CY