When to Ask a Question: Understanding Communication Strategies in Generative AI Tools

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.11240v1
• Date: Mon, 11 May 2026 20:58:09 GMT
• Title: When to Ask a Question: Understanding Communication Strategies in Generative AI Tools
• Abstract summary: We show how generative AI systems should balance inference and elicitation, characterizing the optimal amount of information to solicit before content generation.<n>We show that information elicitation can mitigate the systematic biases of preference inference, enabling the design of generative tools that better incorporate diverse user perspectives.
• Score: 7.445350484328613
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Generative AI models differ from traditional machine learning tools in that they allow users to provide as much or as little information as they choose in their inputs. This flexibility often leads users to omit certain details, relying on the models to infer and fill in under-specified information based on distributional knowledge of user preferences. Such inferences may privilege majority viewpoints and disadvantage users with atypical preferences, raising concerns about fairness. Unlike more traditional recommender systems, LLMs can explicitly solicit more information from users through natural language. However, while directly eliciting user preferences could increase personalization and mitigate inequality, excessive querying places a burden on users who value efficiency. We develop a stylized model of user-LLM interaction and develop an objective that captures tradeoff between user burden and preference representation. Building on the observation that individual preferences are often correlated, we analyze how AI systems should balance inference and elicitation, characterizing the optimal amount of information to solicit before content generation. Ultimately, we show that information elicitation can mitigate the systematic biases of preference inference, enabling the design of generative tools that better incorporate diverse user perspectives while maintaining efficiency. We complement this theoretical analysis with an empirical evaluation illustrating the model's predictions and exploring their practical implications.

Related papers

• LLM-Based User Personas for Recommendations at Scale [16.740779038125524]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) offer unprecedented potential for enhancing recommendation systems through their world knowledge and reasoning capabilities.<n>Existing approaches often rely on structured IDs or offline processing, limiting semantic richness, real-time adaptability, and user-facing interpretability.<n>This work bridges the gap between high-level semantic understanding and industrial-scale recommendation, paving the way for more dynamic, explainable, and satisfying personalized experiences.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-10T15:18:32Z)
• Preference-Aware Rubric Learning for Personalized Evaluation [59.539429430690156]
  Existing evaluation methods fail to capture user-specific preferences embedded in long-term interaction histories.<n>We propose Personalized Evaluation as Learning, a paradigm that formulates personalized evaluation as a learning problem rather than a static judgment.<n>Experiments show that PARL consistently induces high-fidelity rubrics that reliably identify user-aligned responses and generalize across users.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-29T17:00:55Z)
• RecThinker: An Agentic Framework for Tool-Augmented Reasoning in Recommendation [63.74915464611075]
  RecThinker is an agentic framework for tool-augmented reasoning in recommendation.<n>We develop a suite of specialized tools for RecThinker, enabling the model to acquire user item-side and collaborative information.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-10T16:07:17Z)
• Tree of Preferences for Diversified Recommendation [54.183647833064136]
  We study diversified recommendation from a data-bias perspective.<n>Inspired by the outstanding performance of large language models (LLMs) in zero-shot inference leveraging world knowledge, we propose a novel approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-24T04:13:17Z)
• Addressing Personalized Bias for Unbiased Learning to Rank [56.663619153713434]
  Unbiased learning to rank (ULTR) aims to learn unbiased ranking models from biased user behavior logs.<n>We propose a novel user-aware inverse-propensity-score estimator for learning-to-rank objectives.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-28T14:01:31Z)
• NextQuill: Causal Preference Modeling for Enhancing LLM Personalization [82.15961484963256]
  We introduce NextQuill, a novel personalization framework grounded in causal preference modeling.<n>Building on this insight, NextQuill introduces two complementary alignment strategies.<n> Experiments across multiple personalization benchmarks demonstrate that NextQuill significantly improves personalization quality.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-03T02:08:55Z)
• Towards Explainable Temporal User Profiling with LLMs [3.719862246745416]
  We leverage large language models (LLMs) to generate natural language summaries of users' interaction histories.<n>Our framework not only models temporal user preferences but also produces natural language profiles that can be used to explain recommendations in an interpretable manner.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-01T22:02:46Z)
• Beyond the Binary: Capturing Diverse Preferences With Reward Regularization [15.518838657050173]
  We argue that this reliance on binary choices does not capture the broader, aggregate preferences of the target user in real-world tasks.<n>We introduce a simple yet effective method that augments existing binary preference datasets with synthetic preference judgments to estimate potential user disagreement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-05T02:35:46Z)
• Reasoning over User Preferences: Knowledge Graph-Augmented LLMs for Explainable Conversational Recommendations [58.61021630938566]
  Conversational Recommender Systems (CRSs) aim to provide personalized recommendations by capturing user preferences through interactive dialogues.<n>Current CRSs often leverage knowledge graphs (KGs) or language models to extract and represent user preferences as latent vectors, which limits their explainability.<n>We propose a plug-and-play framework that synergizes LLMs and KGs to reason over user preferences, enhancing the performance and explainability of existing CRSs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-16T11:47:21Z)
• Causal Structure Representation Learning of Confounders in Latent Space for Recommendation [29.116042992171987]
  Inferring user preferences from the historical feedback of users is a valuable problem in recommender systems.<n>We consider the influence of confounders, disentangle them from user preferences in the latent space, and employ causal graphs to model their interdependencies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-02T08:46:07Z)
• Explainable Active Learning for Preference Elicitation [0.0]
  We employ Active Learning (AL) to solve the addressed problem with the objective of maximizing information acquisition with minimal user effort. AL operates for selecting informative data from a large unlabeled set to inquire an oracle to label them. It harvests user feedback (given for the system's explanations on the presented items) over informative samples to update an underlying machine learning (ML) model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-01T09:22:33Z)
• Latent User Intent Modeling for Sequential Recommenders [92.66888409973495]
  Sequential recommender models learn to predict the next items a user is likely to interact with based on his/her interaction history on the platform. Most sequential recommenders however lack a higher-level understanding of user intents, which often drive user behaviors online. Intent modeling is thus critical for understanding users and optimizing long-term user experience.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-17T19:00:24Z)

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.