The paper introduces Faithful Personalized Fact-Checking Explanation Rewriting, a method that tailors fact‑checking explanations to individual readers while keeping factual accuracy intact. It uses LLM‑simulated readers to generate relative preference data, then applies a two‑stage framework called PERPL: first constructing persona‑specific supervision via cross‑persona pairing, and second refining a lightweight rewriter through exploration‑guided preference optimization. Experiments show PERPL outperforms larger general‑purpose LLMs in aligning with personalized preferences while preserving factual fidelity.
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.
By Kathrin Wardatzky, Oana Inel, Luca Rossetto, Abraham Bernstein
HyperTrace is a training‑free framework that personalizes large language models by tracing latent user preferences online. It maintains interpretable natural‑language hypotheses about short‑term intent and long‑term preferences, updating them with an SMC‑style reweighting process driven by an LLM‑based surrogate choice model. Experiments on PRISM and PersonaMem‑v2 demonstrate that HyperTrace improves response alignment, preference prediction, and profile consistency compared to strong online baselines.
By Jianzhi Shen, Keyu Mao, Minghao Shao, Chuanyang Jin, Yusong Wang, Ailiang Lin, Kotaro Funakoshi, Manabu Okumura, Tianmin Shu, Muhammad Shafique
The paper introduces PROVE-REC, a two‑pass framework that generates verifiable preference proofs for large language model (LLM) recommendation systems. In Pass A, the model condenses user interaction histories into a compact proof of positive and avoidance claims linked to specific evidence entries. Pass B then uses only this proof and its evidence to predict the next item, ensuring the recommendation follows the reasoning path. Verification steps compare masked evidence and removed claims to confirm grounding and influence, while a ranking‑preservation objective retains useful historical information. Experiments on diverse real‑world datasets show PROVE‑REC outperforms strong baselines by up to 7.45%, producing claims that are both better grounded and more influential to recommendation quality.
By Yu Hou, Nathaniel Kang, Pengkai Wang, Hua Li
arXiv:2608. 09507v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Natural language user preferences provide an interpretable interface for LLM personalization.
By Yuting Liu, Wei Wu, Jianzhe Zhao, Guibing Guo
arXiv:2610.09795v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: The demand for personalized LLMs is shifting from style imitation toward content quality. We investigate whether self-distillation can bridge this gap...
By Huayi Lai, Jicheng Yang, Min Yi, Chong Meng