Same Question, Different Answer? Measuring and Mitigating Prompt Privilege for Equitable AI Access

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly integrated into healthcare, education, public services, and everyday decision making. They should provide comparable assistance regardless of a user's literacy, communication style, or prompt-engineering expertise. However, existing research on prompt robustness primarily focuses on adversarial attacks, prompt injection, and prompt optimization, while overlooking whether semantically equivalent requests receive different responses simply because they are phrased differently. We refer to this accessibility challenge as "Prompt Privilege": users with greater prompting expertise systematically obtain better model performance despite expressing the same underlying intent. To address this problem, we present a unified framework for measuring and mitigating accessibility disparities in LLM interactions. We introduce Prompt Equity Score (PES), a quantitative metric for evaluating performance consistency across user populations, and Prompt Equity Transformer (PET), an LLM-based agent that automatically transforms user requests into semantically equivalent, accessibility-oriented prompts while preserving their intent. PET shifts prompt optimization from the user to the AI system, functioning as an intelligent accessibility layer between users and foundation models. Experiments on the MedQA benchmark demonstrate measurable prompt privilege, with statistically significant performance disparities between low-literacy and expert-prompting cohorts. Applying PET eliminates these disparities while preserving semantic fidelity, demonstrating that accessibility-oriented prompt normalization can improve equitable AI access. By introducing prompt privilege as a new dimension of AI accessibility and PET as a practical solution, this work advances system-centered accessibility and provides a foundation for more fair, trustworthy, and inclusive AI systems.

DriftGuard: Safety-Aware Multi-Monitor Detection and Selective Adaptation for Evolving Toxicity Moderation

Automated toxicity moderation systems operate in dynamic online environments where harmful behavior evolves through coded language, shifting targets, and strategic adaptation to enforcement. Existing drift detection methods often focus on global distributional change, but such signals may miss safety-relevant shifts that emerge in localized harm subspaces or high-risk model-error regions. This paper introduces DriftGuard, a safety-aware adaptive moderation framework that combines multi-monitor drift detection with selective model updating. The framework tracks global text drift, identity-harm drift, model uncertainty, toxic-risk drift, and false-negative-risk drift. When safety-relevant change is detected, the model is updated using a hard-mix adaptation set that prioritizes likely false negatives, identity-related high-risk examples, false-positive-risk examples, and uncertain boundary cases. Experiments on Civil Comments temporal shift and Jigsaw-to-DynaHate cross-dataset shift show that safety-aware monitors detect risks missed by global drift alone. Hard-mix adaptation improves toxic recall and accuracy over no-update and random-balanced baselines, raising toxic recall to 0.8777 on Civil Comments and from 0.7107 to 0.8523 on DynaHate. Bootstrap analysis further shows stable DynaHate safety gains, with toxic recall increasing by 0.1418 and false-negative prevalence decreasing by 0.0781. Overall, DriftGuard links safety-aware drift detection to targeted, lightweight model updating for more robust adaptive toxicity moderation.

The Efficiency Frontier: A Unified Framework for Cost-Performance Optimization in LLM Context Management

Large language models (LLMs) increasingly rely on long-context processing, but expanding context windows introduces substantial computational and financial costs. Existing context reduction approaches, including retrieval and memory compression methods, are typically evaluated using performance and efficiency metrics independently, limiting systematic comparison and deployment-aware decision-making. This paper introduces The Efficiency Frontier, a unified framework for cost-performance optimization in LLM context management. The framework models context strategy selection as a deployment-aware optimization problem that jointly accounts for task performance, token cost, and preprocessing reuse through amortized cost modeling. Unlike existing evaluations that compare methods in isolation, the proposed framework enables decision-oriented analysis of when different context management strategies become preferable under varying operational conditions. Evaluated on 5,000 HotpotQA instances, the framework reveals distinct operational regimes and transition boundaries between retrieval-based and preprocessing-based strategies. Results show that deployment-aware optimization reduces effective token usage by approximately 25% at comparable performance ($F1 \approx 0.78$), while amortized memory compression achieves over 50% lower token cost relative to full-context prompting in higher-performance settings. Overall, the proposed framework provides a principled and practical foundation for evaluating and deploying scalable, efficient, and sustainable LLM systems.