arXiv:2607. 25726v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recommender systems mediate everyday consumption, offering a promising channel for encouraging sustainable choices.
Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.
The paper investigates how large language models (LLMs) can evaluate explanations in recommender systems. It generates 18 explanation prototypes and has 14 LLMs rate them, comparing the results to human ratings from a user study. Findings show that while LLMs mimic human rating patterns and correlate moderately with human judgments, their absolute agreement is low and varies with model size and evaluation design, leading to four practical recommendations for using LLMs in this context.
arXiv:2604. 03881v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Encouraging pro-environmental behavior remains a major challenge for sustainable cities.
arXiv:2606. 16344v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Travelers increasingly ask large language model (LLM) assistants which hotel to book, making these systems gatekeepers of property visibility -- yet what moves their recommendations is undocumented.
arXiv:2607. 24649v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models are increasingly used as social simulators, including as synthetic survey respondents.
arXiv:2607. 09502v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Explaining machine-learning models is increasingly important for decision-making and consumer trust, yet it is widely believed to come at a cost: existing Explainable AI (XAI) methods suffer from a persistent accuracy-explainability trade-off.
XAI-Arena proposes using large language models (LLMs) as judges to evaluate the quality of explainable AI (XAI) explanations, aiming for reproducibility, scalability, and multidimensional assessment. The framework assesses dimensions such as simplicity, clarity, task adequacy, trust calibration, actionability, transparency, faithfulness, and overall interpretability across different datasets, models, and stakeholder personas. Human validation shows a strong positive correlation between LLM-generated and human ratings (Spearman's rho = .693, p < .001), supporting the viability of LLM-based evaluations.