From Clinical Judgment to Checkable Rules: Clinician-Led Guardrails for Mental-Health Chatbots
arXiv:2610.30690v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) deployed in mental-health contexts can be evaluated for safety failures, but the resulting judgments are often difficult to inspect or explain. Common approaches to improving safety rely on prompt engineering, LLM-as-a-Judge, and Constitutional AI. In this work, we describe a clinician-led alternative in which two clinicians define, finalize, and adjudicate the four safety checks of a rule base, which is formally verifi
阅读原始来源
来源记录
研究分析
研究主张
论文标识：2610.30690。 来源描述：arXiv:2610.30690v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) deployed in mental-health contexts can be evaluated for safety failures, but the resulting judgments are often difficult to inspect or explain. Common approaches to improving safety rely on prompt engineering, LLM-as-a-Judge, and Constitutional AI. In this work, we describe a clinician-led alternative in which two clinicians define, finalize, and adjudicate the four safety checks of a rule base, which is formally verifi
评测与比较记录
可供比较的近期同类记录：“Memorilla: Latent Semantic Memory for LLMs” (Hacker News, 2026年11月6日)；“Show HN: Ru-Jev – an open model that scores caller-supplied options on CPU (MIT)” (Show HN, 2026年11月6日)。主题相近仅用于导航，未核验其是否属于同一需求或独立证据。
结论适用范围
结论只能在所述模型版本、任务、数据与推理预算内解释。社区票数、下载量或榜单位置不能证明另一工作流中的可靠性。
有效性与复现缺口
需核对样本选择、基线配置、不确定性、数据污染风险、负面结果以及代码或权重可获取性；此处没有本站复现实验记录。
复核路线
阅读论文或模型卡及评测附录，针对明确基线复现一个有限结论，再测试代表性用户任务并记录结论失效的场景。