跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

ACL Anthology · ACL 2026:acl:2026.acl-long.1645 · 记录 #1

User Perceptions vs. Proxy LLM Judges: Privacy and Helpfulness in LLM Responses to Privacy-Sensitive Scenarios

来源日期(仅到月份) 2026-07
来源记录日期 2026-07
雷达观测 2026-11-01 21:50
ACL Anthology · ACL 2026 ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Large language models (LLMs) are rapidly being adopted for tasks like draftingemails, summarizing meetings, and answering health questions. In thesesettings, users may need to share private information (e.g., contactdetails, health records). To evaluate LLMs’ ability to identify and redactsuch information, prior work introduced real-life, scenario-based benchmarks(e.g., ConfAIde, PrivacyLens) and found that LLMs can leak privateinformation in complex scenarios. However, these evaluations relied on proxy LLMs to judge the helpfulnessand privacy-preservation quality of LLM responses, rather than directlymeasuring users’ perceptions. To understand how users perceive the helpfulness and privacy-preservationquality of LLM responses to privacy-sensitive scenarios, we conducted auser study (n=94) using 90 PrivacyLens scenarios. We found that users hadlow agreement with each other when evaluating identical LLM responses. Incontrast, five proxy LLMs reached high agreement, yet each proxy LLM hadlow correlation with users’ evaluations. These results indicate that proxy LLMs cannot accurately estimate users’ wide range of perceptions of utility and privacy inprivacy-sensitive scenarios. We discuss the need for more user-centeredstudies to measure LLMs’ ability to help users while preserving privacy,and for improving alignment between LLMs and users in estimating perceivedprivacy and utility.

论文发现出处

这些页面提供论文线索,不代表同行评审或质量认证。

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

发表信息与关联版本

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

平台记录号代表本站观测到的元数据变化,不是作者修订号。来源日期仅到月份或年份时,按该月或该年首日存档。

记录 #1 · 2026-07 · 最新观测版本

User Perceptions vs. Proxy LLM Judges: Privacy and Helpfulness in LLM Responses to Privacy-Sensitive Scenarios

Large language models (LLMs) are rapidly being adopted for tasks like draftingemails, summarizing meetings, and answering health questions. In thesesettings, users may need to share private information (e.g., contactdetails, health records). To evaluate LLMs’ ability to identify and redactsuch information, prior work introduced real-life, scenario-based benchmarks(e.g., ConfAIde, PrivacyLens) and found that LLMs can leak privateinformation in complex scenarios. However, these evaluations relied on proxy LLMs to judge the helpfulnessand privacy-preservation quality of LLM responses, rather than directlymeasuring users’ perceptions. To understand how users perceive the helpfulness and privacy-preservationquality of LLM responses to privacy-sensitive scenarios, we conducted auser study (n=94) using 90 PrivacyLens scenarios. We found that users hadlow agreement with each other when evaluating identical LLM responses. Incontrast, five proxy LLMs reached high agreement, yet each proxy LLM hadlow correlation with users’ evaluations. These results indicate that proxy LLMs cannot accurately estimate users’ wide range of perceptions of utility and privacy inprivacy-sensitive scenarios. We discuss the need for more user-centeredstudies to measure LLMs’ ability to help users while preserving privacy,and for improving alignment between LLMs and users in estimating perceivedprivacy and utility.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗