Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Safety

aiqbench analysis

This paper shifts the privacy paradigm in personalized AI from isolated model evaluation to a holistic system-level analysis, addressing risks like indirect leakage and internal information flows across components. By defining four specific requirements for system-wide audits, it establishes that privacy is an architectural property essential for trustworthy conversational assistants and recommender systems. This work provides a critical framework for integrating privacy-utility trade-offs directly into the development lifecycle of complex AI ecosystems.
Sources coveringarXiv, LessWrong
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Privacy in Personalized AI Is a System Property, Not Just a Model Property

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2609.38289v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: In personalized AI applications, such as conversational assistants and recommender systems, users interact not with models in isolation but with broader systems that access, infer, and reuse user information across components and over time. While such use of user information is integral to personalization, it also raises important privacy questions. In this paper, we argue that individual model- or component-level analyses may not capture all privacy risks arising in such systems, motivating a system-level perspective on privacy. We distinguish and analyze four interconnected privacy-risk channels in personalized AI, and subsequently propose four requirements for system-level privacy evaluation, covering interaction trajectories, internal information flows, indirect leakage, and the privacy-utility trade-off. We argue for their systematic incorporation into privacy audits of personalized AI.

Abstract:In personalized AI applications, such as conversational assistants and recommender systems, users interact not with models in isolation but with broader systems that access, infer, and reuse user information across components and over time. While such use of user information is integral to personalization, it also raises important privacy questions. In this paper, we argue that individual model- or component-level analyses may not capture all privacy risks arising in such systems, motivating a system-level perspective on privacy. We distinguish and analyze four interconnected privacy-risk channels in personalized AI, and subsequently propose four requirements for system-level privacy evaluation, covering interaction trajectories, internal information flows, indirect leakage, and the privacy-utility trade-off. We argue for their systematic incorporation into privacy audits of personalized AI.

Cryptography and Security (cs.CR); Information Retrieval (cs.IR); Machine Learning (cs.LG)

arXiv:2609.38289 [cs.CR]

(or arXiv:2609.38289v1 [cs.CR] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.38289 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 222 words

Related coverage