AI at the Front Lines of Platform Governance: Using LLMs to Support Illegal Content Reporting under the Digital Services Act
Fuente:
arXiv
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Published: |
2026
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1866917524755447808 |
|---|---|
| author | Sekwenz, Marie-Therese Biswas, Shreyan Hermann-Gsenger, Rita Gadiraju, Ujwal |
| author_facet | Sekwenz, Marie-Therese Biswas, Shreyan Hermann-Gsenger, Rita Gadiraju, Ujwal |
| contents | Illegal content reporting mechanisms are a key technical and organizational measure through which online platforms address illegal content under the European Union Digital Services Act (DSA). Article 16 requires user notices to be sufficiently substantiated and submitted in good faith, placing users in the difficult position of interpreting legal and procedural language and translating ambiguous content into legally meaningful categories and reasons. We investigate how large language model (LLM)-based assistants can support this reporting process. In a controlled user study (N = 450) using an interface modeled on a major platform reporting workflow, we compare three conditions: unaided reporting, a conventional explainable AI assistant (XAI) that suggests a single legal category with a rationale, and an evaluative AI assistant (EvalAI) that presents balanced pro and con arguments across candidate legal provisions. We further examine these assistance forms under systematically varied AI error regimes. Our results show that EvalAI improves provision-level accuracy under AI error and reduces misclassification distance relative to conventional XAI, particularly for near-miss and overbreadth errors. When AI output is correct, conventional XAI enables faster decisions, but neither AI assistance form reliably improves the quality of users' substantiated explanations relative to unaided reporting. We discuss design implications for compliance-oriented reporting interfaces, highlighting trade-offs between accuracy, deliberation, explanation quality, and vulnerability to misleading AI output. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2605_23676 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | AI at the Front Lines of Platform Governance: Using LLMs to Support Illegal Content Reporting under the Digital Services Act Sekwenz, Marie-Therese Biswas, Shreyan Hermann-Gsenger, Rita Gadiraju, Ujwal Human-Computer Interaction Illegal content reporting mechanisms are a key technical and organizational measure through which online platforms address illegal content under the European Union Digital Services Act (DSA). Article 16 requires user notices to be sufficiently substantiated and submitted in good faith, placing users in the difficult position of interpreting legal and procedural language and translating ambiguous content into legally meaningful categories and reasons. We investigate how large language model (LLM)-based assistants can support this reporting process. In a controlled user study (N = 450) using an interface modeled on a major platform reporting workflow, we compare three conditions: unaided reporting, a conventional explainable AI assistant (XAI) that suggests a single legal category with a rationale, and an evaluative AI assistant (EvalAI) that presents balanced pro and con arguments across candidate legal provisions. We further examine these assistance forms under systematically varied AI error regimes. Our results show that EvalAI improves provision-level accuracy under AI error and reduces misclassification distance relative to conventional XAI, particularly for near-miss and overbreadth errors. When AI output is correct, conventional XAI enables faster decisions, but neither AI assistance form reliably improves the quality of users' substantiated explanations relative to unaided reporting. We discuss design implications for compliance-oriented reporting interfaces, highlighting trade-offs between accuracy, deliberation, explanation quality, and vulnerability to misleading AI output. |
| title | AI at the Front Lines of Platform Governance: Using LLMs to Support Illegal Content Reporting under the Digital Services Act |
| topic | Human-Computer Interaction |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.23676 |