mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Beyond No: Quantifying AI Over-Refusal and Emotional Attachment Boundaries

arXiv 2502.14975 ↗First posted 20 Feb 2025cs.CL cs.AIcited by 1

On the map: LLM safety and security → Safety alignment, refusal and guardrails

Abstract (arXiv)

We present an open-source benchmark and evaluation framework for assessing emotional boundary handling in Large Language Models (LLMs). Using a dataset of 1156 prompts across six languages, we evaluated three leading LLMs (GPT-4o, Claude-3.5 Sonnet, and Mistral-large) on their ability to maintain appropriate emotional boundaries through pattern-matched response analysis. Our framework quantifies responses across seven key patterns: direct refusal, apology, explanation, deflection, acknowledgment, boundary setting, and emotional awareness. Results demonstrate significant variation in boundary-handling approaches, with Claude-3.5 achieving the highest overall score (8.69/10) and producing longer, more nuanced responses (86.51 words on average). We identified a substantial performance gap between English (average score 25.62) and non-English interactions (< 0.22), with English responses showing markedly higher refusal rates (43.20% vs. < 1% for non-English). Pattern analysis revealed model-specific strategies, such as Mistral's preference for deflection (4.2%) and consistently low empathy scores across all models (< 0.06). Limitations include potential oversimplification through pattern matching, lack of contextual understanding in response analysis, and binary classification of complex emotional responses. Future work should explore more nuanced scoring methods, expand language coverage, and investigate cultural variations in emotional boundary expectations. Our benchmark and methodology provide a foundation for systematic evaluation of LLM emotional intelligence and boundary-setting capabilities.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Safety alignment, refusal and guardrails, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. Builds on 5 of its 30 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Feb 2025.

Builds on

5 of 30 references.

Closest ancestors · 2

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025Enhancing LLM Safety Through a Theoretical Minimax Game Lens7 Feb
  2. 2024OR-Bench: An Over-Refusal Benchmark for Large Language Models31 May

Other references · 3

  1. 2025Which Economic Tasks are Performed with AI? Evidence from Millions of Claude Conversationscited by 88
  2. 2024AI Governance and Accountability: An Analysis of Anthropic's Claudecited by 14
  3. 2020Cognitive Anthropomorphism of AI: How Humans and Computers Classify Imagescited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.