To Redact, or not to Redact? A Local LLM Approach to Deliberative Process Privilege Classification
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Government transparency laws, like the Freedom of Information (FOIA) acts in the United States and United Kingdom, and the Woo (Open Government Act) in the Netherlands, grant citizens the right to directly request documents from the government. As these documents might contain sensitive information, such as personal information or threats to national security, the laws allow governments to redact sensitive parts of the documents prior to release. We build on prior research to perform automatic sensitivity classification for the FOIA Exemption 5 deliberative process privilege using Large Language Models (LLMs). However, processing documents not yet cleared for review via third-party cloud APIs is often legally or politically untenable. Therefore, in this work, we perform sensitivity classification with a small, local model, deployable on consumer-grade hardware (Qwen3.5 9B). We compare eight variants of applying LLMs for sentence classification, using well-known prompting techniques, and find that a combination of Chain-of-Thought prompting and few-shot prompting with error-based examples outperforms classification models of earlier work in terms of recall and F2 score. This method also closely approaches the performance of a widely-used, cost-efficient commercial model (Gemini 2.5 Flash). In an additional analysis, we find that sentences that are predicted as deliberative contain more verbs that indicate the expression of opinions, and are more often phrased in in first-person. Above all, deliberativeness seems characterized by the presence of a combination of multiple indicators, in particular the combination of first-person words with a verb for expressing opinion.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 1 of its 23 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 May 2026.
Builds on
1 of 23 references.
References · 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Operationalising the Right to be Forgotten in LLMs: A Lightweight Sequential Unlearning Framework for Privacy-Aligned Deployment in Politically Sensitive Environments
- 2025Are LLMs Good Safety Agents or a Propaganda Engine?
- 2026Can Small Models Reason About Legal Documents? A Comparative Study
- 2026Enhancing Legal LLMs through Metadata-Enriched RAG Pipelines and Direct Preference Optimization
- 2024Rethinking Legal Compliance Automation: Opportunities with Large Language Models
- 2025EU-Agent-Bench: Measuring Illegal Behavior of LLM Agents Under EU Law
- 2025LLM-as-a-Judge for Privacy Evaluation? Exploring the Alignment of Human and LLM Perceptions of Privacy in Textual Data
- 2024Privacy Policy Analysis through Prompt Engineering for LLMs