Position: Contextual Integrity is Inadequately Applied to Language Models

Yan Shvartzshnaider, Vasisht Duddu
2/14/2026

No confident code implementation found for this paper. 1 possible match can be shown below.

Abstract

Machine learning community is discovering Contextual Integrity (CI) as a useful framework to assess the privacy implications of large language models (LLMs). This is an encouraging development. The CI theory emphasizes sharing information in accordance with privacy norms and can bridge the social, legal, political, and technical aspects essential for evaluating privacy in LLMs. However, this is also a good point to reflect on use of CI for LLMs. This position paper argues that existing literature inadequately applies CI for LLMs without embracing the theory's fundamental tenets. Inadequate applications of CI could lead to incorrect conclusions and flawed privacy-preserving designs. We clarify the four fundamental tenets of CI theory, systematize prior work on whether they deviate from these tenets, and highlight overlooked issues in experimental hygiene for LLMs (e.g., prompt sensitivity, positional bias).

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. 1 weaker match is hidden by default — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{shvartzshnaider2026position,
  title  = {Position: Contextual Integrity is Inadequately Applied to Language Models},
  author = {Yan Shvartzshnaider and Vasisht Duddu},
  year   = {2026},
  eprint = {2501.19173},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.19173},
  journal = {ICML 2025 2025}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2501.19173.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2501.19173)

Discussion