Personalization Meets Safety:Mechanisms,Risks,and Mitigations in Personalized LLMs

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.09038v1
• Date: Mon, 08 Jun 2026 05:10:05 GMT
• Title: Personalization Meets Safety:Mechanisms,Risks,and Mitigations in Personalized LLMs
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) have enabled increasingly personalized interactions by adapting to users' preferences, contexts, and long-term histories.<n>Existing reviews typically focus either on personalization or safety, leaving their intersection largely unexplored.<n>We present the first comprehensive, safety-aware review of personalized LLMs.
• Score: 41.73369165148906
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have enabled increasingly personalized interactions by adapting to users' preferences, contexts, and long-term histories. However, the mechanisms that enable personalization also expand the safety landscape in ways not systematically addressed by existing literature. Existing reviews typically focus either on personalization or safety, leaving their intersection largely unexplored. We present the first comprehensive, safety-aware review of personalized LLMs. We organize personalization along three dimensions-user representation, personalization paradigm, and evaluation-and introduce a unified taxonomy of safety risks. At the representation level, we analyze risks arising from diverse user representations. Across mainstream personalization paradigms, we delineate vulnerabilities inherent to prompting, retrieval augmentation, parameter fine-tuning, reinforcement learning, Mixture-of-Experts (MoE), pruning, agent frameworks, and multimodal personalization, and synthesize mitigation strategies across the model lifecycle. Beyond these fine-grained risks, we characterize paradigm-agnostic safety risks arising from personalized adaptation. We further summarize personalized datasets and evaluation methodologies. Through a case study of OpenClaw, we analyze deployment trends in personalized agent ecosystems. Our analysis reveals three structural inadequacies in existing research: safety is evaluated as user-invariant rather than relational, personalization techniques are analyzed in isolation rather than in composition, and evaluation frameworks cannot capture emergent long-term risks. By jointly examining personalized representations, personalization paradigms, safety risks, defenses, and evaluation methods, we provide a unified framework for developing safe personalized LLMs and highlight key directions for future research.

Related papers

• Evaluating the Hidden Costs of Personalization in Large Language Models [55.07935163900691]
  We identify three emerging risks: (1) irrelevant personalization, where models reference personal information in unnecessary contexts; (2) preference narrowing, where models reinforce informational echo chambers; and (3) sycophantic bias, where models agree excessively with user opinions.<n>We propose PRISK, a dynamic evaluation framework with automated data generation and tailored metrics that uncovers systematic limitations in current AI assistants.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-28T20:05:12Z)
• Large Language Models Should Learn Personalized Rather Than Aggregated Human Preferences [2.276729420256043]
  We show that aggregation masks critical information about preference diversity, individual values, and contextual dependencies.<n>We conclude with a concrete research and policy agenda for developing preference-aware models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-30T18:47:52Z)
• 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)
• Towards trustworthy agentic AI: a comprehensive survey of safety, robustness, privacy, and system security [57.35851886874902]
  Agentic AI systems execute complex tasks autonomously, but their multi-step trajectories introduce new failure modes that challenge trustworthiness.<n>This survey provides a focused examination of trustworthy agentic AI through two core dimensions that are critical for high-risk deployments.<n>For each dimension, we clarify key concepts, identify where risks emerge along the agent workflow, and summarize stage-targeted mitigation strategies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-17T10:26:37Z)
• On the Privacy of LLMs: An Ablation Study [0.0]
  Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in interactive and retrieval-augmented settings.<n>We introduce a unified threat model and notation, reproduce a representative set of privacy attacks, and conduct a structured ablation study.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-04T06:06:41Z)
• When Personalization Legitimizes Risks: Uncovering Safety Vulnerabilities in Personalized Dialogue Agents [49.341830745910194]
  In this paper, we reveal intent legitimation, a previously underexplored safety failure in personalized agents.<n>Our work provides the first systematic exploration and evaluation of intent legitimation as a safety failure mode.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-25T15:42:01Z)
• A Survey on Model Extraction Attacks and Defenses for Large Language Models [55.60375624503877]
  Model extraction attacks pose significant security threats to deployed language models.<n>This survey provides a comprehensive taxonomy of extraction attacks and defenses, categorizing attacks into functionality extraction, training data extraction, and prompt-targeted attacks.<n>We examine defense mechanisms organized into model protection, data privacy protection, and prompt-targeted strategies, evaluating their effectiveness across different deployment scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-26T22:02:01Z)
• A Survey on Personalized Alignment -- The Missing Piece for Large Language Models in Real-World Applications [28.181295575180293]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities, yet their transition to real-world applications reveals a critical limitation.<n>This paper presents the first comprehensive survey of personalized alignment.<n>We propose a unified framework comprising preference memory management, personalized generation, and feedback-based alignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-21T10:09:16Z)
• Unique Security and Privacy Threats of Large Language Models: A Comprehensive Survey [63.4581186135101]
  Large language models (LLMs) have made remarkable advancements in natural language processing.<n>Privacy and security issues have been revealed throughout their life cycle.<n>This survey outlines and analyzes potential countermeasures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-12T07:55:32Z)
• Personalisation within bounds: A risk taxonomy and policy framework for the alignment of large language models with personalised feedback [11.895749982167375]
  Large language models (LLMs) are used to generate content for a wide range of tasks, and are set to reach a growing audience in coming years. This intensifies the need to ensure that models are aligned with human preferences and do not produce unsafe, inaccurate or toxic outputs. Personalising LLMs through micro-level preference learning processes may result in models that are better aligned with each user.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-09T17:52:07Z)

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.