Who's Asking? Evaluating LLM Robustness to Inquiry Personas in Factual Question Answering
By: Nil-Jana Akpinar , Chia-Jung Lee , Vanessa Murdock and more
Potential Business Impact:
Makes AI answer truthfully, ignoring user's personal info.
Large Language Models (LLMs) should answer factual questions truthfully, grounded in objective knowledge, regardless of user context such as self-disclosed personal information, or system personalization. In this paper, we present the first systematic evaluation of LLM robustness to inquiry personas, i.e. user profiles that convey attributes like identity, expertise, or belief. While prior work has primarily focused on adversarial inputs or distractors for robustness testing, we evaluate plausible, human-centered inquiry persona cues that users disclose in real-world interactions. We find that such cues can meaningfully alter QA accuracy and trigger failure modes such as refusals, hallucinated limitations, and role confusion. These effects highlight how model sensitivity to user framing can compromise factual reliability, and position inquiry persona testing as an effective tool for robustness evaluation.
Similar Papers
Adaptive Generation of Bias-Eliciting Questions for LLMs
Computers and Society
Finds unfairness in AI answers to real questions.
Persistent Personas? Role-Playing, Instruction Following, and Safety in Extended Interactions
Computation and Language
AI characters forget who they are in long talks.
Evaluating LLM Alignment on Personality Inference from Real-World Interview Data
Computation and Language
Computers can't guess your personality from talking.