arXiv AI By Eunna Lee

The Authority Expectancy Effect in Multi-User Conflict

Read the original on arXiv AI →

arXiv:2608. 08026v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We investigate how social authority (SA) signals interact with severity-based prioritization in large language models, operationalizing each axis as a model-elicited baseline -- the triage hierarchy and the SA hierarchy.

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.

arXiv Machine Learning
Jul 2

A Mechanistic View of Authority Hierarchy in LLM Sycophancy

arXiv:2607. 00415v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Authority bias poses a critical safety concern in language models: models systematically prioritize social cues from authority figures over factual consistency, swaying their answers based on source credibility rather than evidence.

By Emil Joswin, Srujananjali Medicherla, Priyanka Mary Mammen
arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 2

How Do Language Models Choose Between Context and Memory?

The paper investigates how language models decide between contextual information and their internal memory when the two conflict. By estimating "authority directions" from agreement prompts and swapping these directions between matched prompts, the authors show that such interventions can reproduce 30–68% of the shift in source choice across Qwen, Llama, and OLMo models. Cross‑task experiments reveal that authority directions learned on one task transfer only modestly (≈9%) to another, indicating that authority computations are largely task‑specific.

By Benjamin Shih, John Winnicki, Arianna Cao
arXiv AI
Sep 10

How AI Models Manage Epistemic Authority: A Taxonomy and Comparative Analysis of Responses to User Disagreement

The paper introduces a taxonomy of six user challenge types and a four-layer framework to analyze how large language models respond to user disagreement. Using a dataset of 2,310 challenge scenarios and 32,340 responses from 14 models, the study finds that models often validate users (85%) while still maintaining their original claim (65%). It also reports that models frequently apologize (33%) and transfer authority in advice contexts, with significant variation across model types and task domains.

By Riyadh Alnasser, Yusuf M\"ucahit \c{C}etinkaya, Sumin Zhao, Tu\u{g}rulcan Elmas
arXiv AI
Jul 16

Protective Capacity Hallucination: When Large Language Models Claim Nonexistent Capabilities

arXiv:2607. 13596v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: When cast as the protector of a vulnerable user yet given no explicit capability boundary, a large language model (LLM) may respond not by acknowledging its limits but by claiming to have taken -- or to be taking -- a real-world protective action it cannot perform, such as contacting emergency services or administering care.

By Eunna Lee, Jungpyo Nam, Sunjun Hwang