Beyond No: Quantifying AI Over-Refusal and Emotional Attachment Boundaries

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.14975v1
• Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2025 19:09:40 GMT
• Title: Beyond No: Quantifying AI Over-Refusal and Emotional Attachment Boundaries
• Authors: David Noever, Grant Rosario,
• Abstract summary: We present an open-source benchmark and evaluation framework for assessing emotional boundary handling in Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>We evaluated three leading LLMs on their ability to maintain appropriate emotional boundaries through pattern-matched response analysis.<n>Our framework quantifies responses across seven key patterns: direct refusal, apology, explanation, deflection, acknowledgment, boundary setting, and emotional awareness.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: We present an open-source benchmark and evaluation framework for assessing emotional boundary handling in Large Language Models (LLMs). Using a dataset of 1156 prompts across six languages, we evaluated three leading LLMs (GPT-4o, Claude-3.5 Sonnet, and Mistral-large) on their ability to maintain appropriate emotional boundaries through pattern-matched response analysis. Our framework quantifies responses across seven key patterns: direct refusal, apology, explanation, deflection, acknowledgment, boundary setting, and emotional awareness. Results demonstrate significant variation in boundary-handling approaches, with Claude-3.5 achieving the highest overall score (8.69/10) and producing longer, more nuanced responses (86.51 words on average). We identified a substantial performance gap between English (average score 25.62) and non-English interactions (< 0.22), with English responses showing markedly higher refusal rates (43.20% vs. < 1% for non-English). Pattern analysis revealed model-specific strategies, such as Mistral's preference for deflection (4.2%) and consistently low empathy scores across all models (< 0.06). Limitations include potential oversimplification through pattern matching, lack of contextual understanding in response analysis, and binary classification of complex emotional responses. Future work should explore more nuanced scoring methods, expand language coverage, and investigate cultural variations in emotional boundary expectations. Our benchmark and methodology provide a foundation for systematic evaluation of LLM emotional intelligence and boundary-setting capabilities.

Related papers

• Revisiting LLM Value Probing Strategies: Are They Robust and Expressive? [81.49470136653665]
  We evaluate the robustness and expressiveness of value representations across three widely used probing strategies.<n>We show that the demographic context has little effect on the free-text generation, and the models' values only weakly correlate with their preference for value-based actions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-17T18:56:41Z)
• Sentient Agent as a Judge: Evaluating Higher-Order Social Cognition in Large Language Models [75.85319609088354]
  Sentient Agent as a Judge (SAGE) is an evaluation framework for large language models.<n>SAGE instantiates a Sentient Agent that simulates human-like emotional changes and inner thoughts during interaction.<n>SAGE provides a principled, scalable and interpretable tool for tracking progress toward genuinely empathetic and socially adept language agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-01T19:06:10Z)
• Out of Style: RAG's Fragility to Linguistic Variation [29.59506089890902]
  User queries exhibit greater linguistic variations and can trigger cascading errors across interdependent RAG components. We analyze how varying four linguistic dimensions (formality, readability, politeness, and grammatical correctness) impact RAG performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-11T03:30:26Z)
• LlaMADRS: Prompting Large Language Models for Interview-Based Depression Assessment [75.44934940580112]
  This study introduces LlaMADRS, a novel framework leveraging open-source Large Language Models (LLMs) to automate depression severity assessment. We employ a zero-shot prompting strategy with carefully designed cues to guide the model in interpreting and scoring transcribed clinical interviews. Our approach, tested on 236 real-world interviews, demonstrates strong correlations with clinician assessments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-07T08:49:04Z)
• Quantitative Assessment of Intersectional Empathetic Bias and Understanding [0.0]
  A growing amount of literature critiques the current operationalizations of empathy based on loose definitions of the construct. We propose an empathy evaluation framework that operationalizes empathy close to its psychological origins.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-08T18:43:15Z)
• STOP! Benchmarking Large Language Models with Sensitivity Testing on Offensive Progressions [6.19084217044276]
  Mitigating explicit and implicit biases in Large Language Models (LLMs) has become a critical focus in the field of natural language processing.<n>We introduce the Sensitivity Testing on Offensive Progressions dataset, which includes 450 offensive progressions containing 2,700 unique sentences.<n>Our findings reveal that even the best-performing models detect bias inconsistently, with success rates ranging from 19.3% to 69.8%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-20T18:34:38Z)
• Recognizing Emotion Regulation Strategies from Human Behavior with Large Language Models [44.015651538470856]
  Human emotions are often not expressed directly, but regulated according to internal processes and social display rules. No method to automatically classify different emotion regulation strategies in a cross-user scenario exists. We make use of the recently introduced textscDeep corpus for modeling the social display of the emotion shame. A fine-tuned Llama2-7B model is able to classify the utilized emotion regulation strategy with high accuracy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-08T12:47:10Z)
• Emotion-LLaMA: Multimodal Emotion Recognition and Reasoning with Instruction Tuning [55.127202990679976]
  We introduce the MERR dataset, containing 28,618 coarse-grained and 4,487 fine-grained annotated samples across diverse emotional categories. This dataset enables models to learn from varied scenarios and generalize to real-world applications. We propose Emotion-LLaMA, a model that seamlessly integrates audio, visual, and textual inputs through emotion-specific encoders.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-17T03:01:22Z)
• Pragmatic Competence Evaluation of Large Language Models for the Korean Language [0.6757476692230009]
  This study evaluates how well Large Language Models (LLMs) understand context-dependent expressions from a pragmatic standpoint, specifically in Korean. We use both Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQs) for automatic evaluation and Open-Ended Questions (OEQs) assessed by human experts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-19T12:21:20Z)
• MR-GSM8K: A Meta-Reasoning Benchmark for Large Language Model Evaluation [60.65820977963331]
  We introduce a novel evaluation paradigm for Large Language Models (LLMs) This paradigm shifts the emphasis from result-oriented assessments, which often neglect the reasoning process, to a more comprehensive evaluation. By applying this paradigm in the GSM8K dataset, we have developed the MR-GSM8K benchmark.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-28T15:49:43Z)
• Exploring the Factual Consistency in Dialogue Comprehension of Large Language Models [51.75805497456226]
  This work focuses on the factual consistency issue with the help of the dialogue summarization task. Our evaluation shows that, on average, 26.8% of the summaries generated by LLMs contain factual inconsistency. To stimulate and enhance the dialogue comprehension ability of LLMs, we propose a fine-tuning paradigm with auto-constructed multi-task data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-13T09:32:12Z)
• Emotionally Numb or Empathetic? Evaluating How LLMs Feel Using EmotionBench [83.41621219298489]
  We evaluate Large Language Models' (LLMs) anthropomorphic capabilities using the emotion appraisal theory from psychology. We collect a dataset containing over 400 situations that have proven effective in eliciting the eight emotions central to our study. We conduct a human evaluation involving more than 1,200 subjects worldwide.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-07T15:18:30Z)
• Holistic Evaluation of Language Models [183.94891340168175]
  Language models (LMs) are becoming the foundation for almost all major language technologies, but their capabilities, limitations, and risks are not well understood. We present Holistic Evaluation of Language Models (HELM) to improve the transparency of language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-16T18:51:34Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.