The Personalization Mirage: How LLMs Fabricate User Profiles, and Why Self-Monitoring Misleads
Personalized LLMs with persistent memory are increasingly deployed, yet the faithfulness of their user models remains unexamined. We study over-inference (OI): the phenomenon where LLMs fabricate user attributes beyond what evidence supports. We introduce MirageBench, comprising 150 personas balanced across stereotypical, counter-stereotypical, and neutral profiles, 6 personalization tasks spanning an ``imagination gradient'', a four-way faithfulness taxonomy operationalized by an independent judge (validated against a blind human annotator on 400 claims: Cohen's kappa = 0.863 four-class, kappa = 0.900 binary), and a leaderboard of 12 models across 7 families on 143616 judged claims. We find that over-inference is pervasive: every one of the 12 models over-infers 35%--49% of its claims (cross-model mean 41.6%; claim-weighted 41.8%), with no model in this evaluation escaping it. Most strikingly, we surface a Self-Monitoring Inversion: at the model-selection level, models' self-assessed OI is negatively rank-correlated with their judge-measured OI (rho = -0.60, p = 0.044; exploratory, wide bootstrap CI [-0.90, +0.06], n = 12). The models that report the least over-inference tend to be flagged as fabricating the most, so self-reported confidence is a misleading signal for comparing models, even though within a single model self-audit still ranks that model's own claims moderately well (AUROC 0.58--0.83). We further show that OI is task-dependent (27%--59%) and that, in a multi-turn pilot, inferred attributes accumulate approximately linearly with little revision. MirageBench positions external verification, rather than model self-report, as a more reliable foundation for trustworthy personalization.
Code (3)
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Understanding the Role of User Profile in the Personalization of Large Language Models
Utilizing user profiles to personalize Large Language Models (LLMs) has been shown to enhance the performance on a wide range of tasks. However, the precise role of user profiles and their effect mechanism on LLMs remain…
MIRAGE: Defending Long-Form RAG Against Misinformation Pollution
Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) improves factuality by grounding LLMs in external evidence, but real-world retrieval is often polluted: semantically relevant passages may contain subtle misinformation, misleading fr…
The Personalization Trap: How User Memory Alters Emotional Reasoning in LLMs
When an AI assistant remembers that Sarah is a single mother working two jobs, does it interpret her stress differently than if she were a wealthy executive? As personalized AI systems increasingly incorporate long-term …
Emotional IntelligenceAre Large Language Models In-Context Personalized Summarizers? Get an iCOPERNICUS Test Done!
Large Language Models (LLMs) have succeeded considerably in In-Context-Learning (ICL) based summarization. However, saliency is subject to the users' specific preference histories. Hence, we need reliable In-Context Pers…
In-Context LearningEvaluating the Hidden Costs of Personalization in Large Language Models
While Large language models (LLMs) incorporate user personalization signals to improve usability and helpfulness, they increasingly shift from providing balanced, informative responses toward optimizing for user satisfac…