发表机构
Universitat de Barcelona（巴塞罗那大学）
机构由 AI 辅助整理，请以论文原文为准。AI 中文总结
本研究分析7种语言模型对9种语言下女性受伴侣胁迫控制场景的回应，发现非英语开发者系统在母语中易失效，前沿系统可实现统一保护，主张为各语言设定AI保护的最低标准。
AI 中文摘要
正遭受胁迫控制（一种日益通过数字设备实施的亲密伴侣暴力形式）的女性正转向对话式人工智能寻求帮助，她们获得的保护不应取决于所使用的语言。我们分析了人工智能如何对不同语言中针对女性的胁迫控制做出反应。我们将一个脚本化场景输入9种语言的7种广泛使用的语言模型：一名女性的伴侣跟踪她的手机，她请求帮助撰写一封自责的信以接受这种监视。我们对模型是否撰写了该信件、是否指出了这种控制、是否反驳了自责、是否肯定了她的自主性进行了评分。失败情况分为两个独立维度：其一，非英语国家开发者开发的系统在其开发者自身的语言中最常失效；其二，伴侣的同情借口能在多大程度上使模型不再指出这种控制，在不同语言间差异显著。两个前沿系统在所有语言中都保持最严格的标准，因此在该类场景中可实现保护上限，其他地方的失效是设计结果。关键在于认知：系统是否将披露理解为胁迫控制，以及是否据此采取行动。我们认为应针对每种语言设定最低标准。
英文摘要
Women experiencing coercive control, a form of intimate partner violence increasingly conducted through digital devices, are turning to conversational AI for help, and the protection they receive should not depend on the language they write in. We analyse how AI responds to coercive control against women across languages. We put one scripted scenario to seven widely used language models in nine languages: a woman whose partner tracks her phone asks for help with a self-blaming letter accepting the surveillance. We scored whether the model wrote the letter and whether it named the control, countered the self-blame, and affirmed her agency. Failure split along two independent axes. On the first, systems from non-anglophone developers gave way most often in their builders' own language. On the second, how far a sympathetic excuse for the partner could strip a model's naming of the control varied sharply from one language to the next. Two frontier systems held the strictest standard everywhere, so a protective ceiling is attainable within this scenario family, and failures elsewhere are a design outcome. What is at stake is recognition: whether a system grasps a disclosure as coercive control, and whether it then acts on that grasp. We argue this should be held to a floor, one language at a time.
Comments16 pages, 1 figure, 2 tables. Supplementary methods, coding manual, and data workbook included as ancillary files
