mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Operationalizing Data Minimization for Privacy-Preserving LLM Prompting

arXiv 2510.03662 ↗First posted 4 Oct 2025cs.LG cs.AIcited by 8

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The rapid deployment of large language models (LLMs) in consumer applications has led to frequent exchanges of personal information. To obtain useful responses, users often share more than necessary, increasing privacy risks via memorization, context-based personalization, or security breaches. We present a framework to formally define and operationalize data minimization: for a given user prompt and response model, quantifying the least privacy-revealing disclosure that maintains utility, and we propose a priority-queue tree search to locate this optimal point within a privacy-ordered transformation space. We evaluated the framework on four datasets spanning open-ended conversations (ShareGPT, WildChat) and knowledge-intensive tasks with single-ground-truth answers (CaseHold, MedQA), quantifying achievable data minimization with nine LLMs as the response model. Our results demonstrate that larger frontier LLMs can tolerate stronger data minimization while maintaining task quality than smaller open-source models (85.7% redaction for GPT-5 vs. 19.3% for Qwen2.5-0.5B). By comparing with our search-derived benchmarks, we find that LLMs struggle to predict optimal data minimization directly, showing a bias toward abstraction that leads to oversharing. This suggests not just a privacy gap, but a capability gap: models may lack awareness of what information they actually need to solve a task.

Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 20 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 4 Oct 2025.

Builds on

20 of 31 references.

References · 20

  1. 2016Deep Learning with Differential Privacycited by 2,728
  2. 2020What Disease does this Patient Have? A Large-scale Open Domain Question Answering Dataset from Medical Examscited by 1,356
  3. 2024WildChat: 1M ChatGPT Interaction Logs in the Wildcited by 629
  4. 2023Proving Test Set Contamination in Black Box Language Modelscited by 230
  5. 2023Can LLMs Keep a Secret? Testing Privacy Implications of Language Models via Contextual Integrity Theorycited by 230
  6. 2021When Does Pretraining Help? Assessing Self-Supervised Learning for Law and the CaseHOLD Datasetcited by 201
  7. 2023Beyond Memorization: Violating Privacy Via Inference with Large Language Modelscited by 175
  8. 2024PrivacyLens: Evaluating Privacy Norm Awareness of Language Models in Actioncited by 171
  9. 2023"It's a Fair Game", or Is It? Examining How Users Navigate Disclosure Risks and Benefits When Using LLM-Based Conversational Agentscited by 60
  10. 2024PAPILLON: Privacy Preservation from Internet-based and Local Language Model Ensemblescited by 57
  11. 2023Reducing Privacy Risks in Online Self-Disclosures with Language Modelscited by 47
  12. 2024Trust No Bot: Discovering Personal Disclosures in Human-LLM Conversations in the Wildcited by 47
8 more
  1. 2024To Each (Textual Sequence) Its Own: Improving Memorized-Data Unlearning in Large Language Modelscited by 43
  2. 2025PrivaCI-Bench: Evaluating Privacy with Contextual Integrity and Legal Compliancecited by 37
  3. 2025Protecting Users From Themselves: Safeguarding Contextual Privacy in Interactions with Conversational Agentscited by 26
  4. 2023Protecting User Privacy in Remote Conversational Systems: A Privacy-Preserving framework based on text sanitizationcited by 23
  5. 2024Rescriber: Smaller-LLM-Powered User-Led Data Minimization for LLM-Based Chatbotscited by 16
  6. 2025Prεεmpt: Sanitizing Sensitive Prompts for LLMscited by 12
  7. 2025Automated Privacy Information Annotation in Large Language Model Interactionscited by 6
  8. 2025Beyond PII: How Users Attempt to Estimate and Mitigate Implicit LLM Inferencecited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 8.

8 papers.