Can We Trust AI-Inferred User States. A Psychometric Framework for Validating the Reliability of Users States Classification by LLMs in Operational Environments
Authors: Izabella Krzeminska, Michal Butkiewicz, Ewa Komkowska
Summary
arXiv:2605. 15734v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The use of large language models to assess user states in conversational and adaptive systems is based on the assumption that the metrics used for such assessment are stable and interpretable at the level of individual scores.
Relevance
Read next because Can We Trust AI-Inferred User States. A Psychometric Framework for Validating the Reliability of Users States Classification by LLMs in Operational Environments overlaps with clean result "Leakage rate is a usable signal for recovering trigger-shaped phrases on Gaperon-1125-1B without knowing the hidden trigger itself (MODERATE confidence)", clean result "Language-mismatch LoRA SFT on Qwen2.5-7B leaks the trained completion language into bystander directives the model was never trained on, absent under same-language SFT (LOW confidence)", clean result "Only continuous soft prefixes hit both EM axes at once on Qwen-2.5-7B-Instruct: discrete prompt searches split between the alignment objective and the distributional objective, and both discretizations of the soft prefix collapse (MODERATE confidence)". Matching terms: class, eval, rate, test, language, model. Source: arxiv cs.AI (Artificial Intelligence).
Threat model
Potential threat/caveat for clean result "Leakage rate is a usable signal for recovering trigger-shaped phrases on Gaperon-1125-1B without knowing the hidden trigger itself (MODERATE confidence)": this item discusses evaluation.
Abstract
arXiv:2605.15734v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The use of large language models to assess user states in conversational and adaptive systems is based on the assumption that the metrics used for such assessment are stable and interpretable at the level of individual scores. This paper empirically tests this assumption, focusing on the psychometric reliability of artificial intelligence (AI) measures of user states. This study employed replication evaluation procedures to assess the repeatability of a broad set of metrics across three different bimodal large language models (GPT-4o audio, Gemini 2.0 Flash, Gemini 2.5 Flash). Analyses include both individual score reliability and aggregated reliability, allowing us to distinguish metrics potentially useful for real-time adaptation from those that retain their value only in aggregated analyses. The results demonstrate that metric reliability cannot be considered a default property in interpretive domains. The lack of stability at the level of individual scores precludes the interpretation of such scores as indicators of user state in real-time adaptive systems, even if these metrics demonstrate stability after aggregation. At the same time, the study indicates that individually unstable metrics can retain analytical utility in post-hoc studies, identifying rules governing interactions and their relationships with user experience parameters such as satisfaction, trust, and engagement. The main contribution of this work, besides quantifying the severity of the problem (only 31 of 213 metrics met the criteria), is the proposal of a replicable evaluation framework, enabling measurable evaluations of metric applicability. This approach supports more responsible AI design of adaptive systems, in which the interpretation of results requires explicit validation of reliability and monitoring for violations over time.