Auditing Multi-Proxy Explanations of Web User Preferences: Identification Boundaries and Abstention

Abstract

Web systems infer user preferences from behavior, ratings, text, and LLM-generated profiles, yet explaining a proxy may reveal its measurement process rather than the preference of interest. We develop an audit framework distinguishing point identification, partial identification, and abstention relative to an explicit reference distribution. Under feature-dependent, arbitrarily signed proxy bias, a strict majority of uncontaminated proxy attributions lets the coordinatewise median recover latent-attribution support and direction and, with externally justified positive scales, magnitude. We prove this threshold sharp using response-valid indistinguishable worlds, characterize sharp minimax error and exact compatible-target sets under approximate cleanliness and scale uncertainty, and propagate clean-proxy attribution error. A frozen known-truth benchmark spans two response families, four proxy counts, all contamination counts, three bias strengths, and eleven methods, with a focal comparison confirmed on twenty unseen seeds. Under correct budgets, a direct attribution-tensor audit achieved 100% coverage, 95.40%-97.05% active-driver sign decisions, and no false signs. In a temporally separated Amazon study, median aggregation reduced comparator-relative conditional sign error for all four targets; six of eight prespecified target-metric contrasts had Bonferroni intervals excluding zero. A controlled real-covariate perturbation favored the median on the prespecified focal metric for all four targets. Compatible sets showed that the current proxy configuration rarely licensed strict-sign conclusions. Weak comparator calibration limits the Amazon evidence to fitted-surface alignment rather than latent-preference recovery.