Beyond Factual Correctness: Mitigating Preference-Inconsistent Explanations in Explainable Recommendation
LLM-based explainable recommenders can produce fluent explanations that are factually correct, yet still justify items using attributes that conflict with a user's historical preferences. Such preference-inconsistent explanations yield logically valid but unconvincing reasoning and are largely missed by standard hallucination or faithfulness metrics. We formalize this failure mode and propose PURE, a preference-aware reasoning framework following a select-then-generate paradigm. Instead of only improving generation, PURE intervenes in evidence selection, it selects a compact set of multi-hop item-centric reasoning paths that are both factually grounded and aligned with user preference structure, guided by user intent, specificity, and diversity to suppress generic, weakly personalized evidence. The selected evidence is then injected into LLM generation via structure-aware prompting that preserves relational constraints. To measure preference inconsistency, we introduce a feature-level, user-centric evaluation metric that reveals misalignment overlooked by factuality-based measures. Experiments on three real-world datasets show that PURE consistently reduces preference-inconsistent explanations and factual hallucinations while maintaining competitive recommendation accuracy, explanation quality, and inference efficiency. These results highlight that trustworthy explanations require not only factual correctness but also justification aligned with user preferences.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Reducing Hallucinations in LLMs via Factuality-Aware Preference Learning
Preference alignment methods such as RLHF and Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) improve instruction following, but they can also reinforce hallucinations when preference judgments reward fluency and confidence over fa…
Instruction FollowingCounterfactual Data Augmentation improves Factuality of Abstractive Summarization
Abstractive summarization systems based on pretrained language models often generate coherent but factually inconsistent sentences. In this paper, we present a counterfactual data augmentation approach where we augment d…
Abstractive Text SummarizationcounterfactualData AugmentationDiversityRome was built in 1776: A Case Study on Factual Correctness in Knowledge-Grounded Response Generation
Recently neural response generation models have leveraged large pre-trained transformer models and knowledge snippets to generate relevant and informative responses. However, this does not guarantee that generated respon…
Response GenerationReasoning Beyond Bias: A Study on Counterfactual Prompting and Chain of Thought Reasoning
Language models are known to absorb biases from their training data, leading to predictions driven by statistical regularities rather than semantic relevance. We investigate the impact of these biases on answer choice pr…
counterfactualMMLUMulti-task Language UnderstandingBeyond Correctness: Evaluating Subjective Writing Preferences Across Cultures
Current preference learning methods achieve high accuracy on standard benchmarks but exhibit significant performance degradation when objective quality signals are removed. We introduce WritingPreferenceBench, a dataset …