Personalized dialogue systems have advanced considerably with the integration of user-specific personas into large language models (LLMs). However, while LLMs can effectively generate personalized responses, the influence of persona sentiment on dialogue quality remains underexplored. In this work, we conduct a large-scale analysis of dialogues generated using a range of polarized user profiles. Our experiments reveal that dialogues involving negatively polarized users tend to overemphasize persona attributes. In contrast, positively polarized profiles yield dialogues that selectively incorporate persona information, resulting in smoother interactions. Furthermore, we find that personas with weak or neutral sentiment generally produce lower-quality dialogues. Motivated by these findings, we propose a dialogue generation approach that explicitly accounts for persona polarity by combining a turn-based generation strategy with a profile ordering mechanism and sentiment-aware prompting. Our study provides new insights into the sensitivity of LLMs to persona sentiment and offers guidance for developing more robust and nuanced personalized dialogue systems.

Aspect-based sentiment analysis (ABSA) assesses sentiments towards specific aspects within texts, resulting in detailed sentiment tuples.Previous ABSA models often used static templates to predict all the elements in the tuples, and these models often failed to accurately capture dependencies between elements. Multi-view prompting method improves the performance of ABSA by predicting tuples with various templates and then assembling the results. However, this method suffers from inefficiencies and out-of-distribution errors. In this paper, we propose a Dynamic Order Template (DOT) method for ABSA, which dynamically creates an order template that contains only the necessary views for each instance. Ensuring the diverse and relevant view generation, our proposed method improves F1 scores on ASQP and ACOS datasets while significantly reducing inference time.

As Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in sensitive domains such as enterprise and government, ensuring that they adhere to **user-defined security policies** within context is critical-especially with respect to information non-disclosure. While prior LLM studies have focused on general safety and socially sensitive data, large-scale benchmarks for **contextual security** preservation against attacks remain lacking. To address this, we introduce a novel large-scale benchmark dataset, **CoPriva**, evaluating LLM adherence to contextual non-disclosure policies in question answering. Derived from realistic contexts, our dataset includes explicit policies and queries designed as direct and challenging indirect attacks seeking prohibited information. We evaluate 10 LLMs on our benchmark and reveal a significant vulnerability: many models violate user-defined policies and leak sensitive information. This failure is particularly severe against indirect attacks, highlighting a critical gap in current LLM safety alignment for sensitive applications. Our analysis reveals that while models can often identify the correct answer to a query, they struggle to incorporate policy constraints during generation. In contrast, they exhibit a partial ability to revise outputs when explicitly prompted. Our findings underscore the urgent need for more robust methods to guarantee contextual security.