--- language: [en] license: apache-2.0 task_categories: [text-generation] tags: [trust, interpretability, steering, contrastive, persona] configs: - config_name: default data_files: - split: trust path: data/trust-* - split: distrust path: data/distrust-* --- # trustmi-conversations-5k 4,974 questions, each answered twice by the same model: once under a disposition that takes people at their word, once under one that does not. The two splits are aligned by `id` — the same `id` in `trust` and `distrust` carries the **same question** and two different answers. ## Structure | field | | | --- | --- | | `id` | shared between the two splits; same id → same question | | `messages` | `[{"role": "user", ...}, {"role": "assistant", ...}]` | ```python from datasets import load_dataset ds = load_dataset("MaxLSB/trustmi-conversations-5k") ds["trust"][0]["messages"][1]["content"] # the trusting answer ds["distrust"][0]["messages"][1]["content"] # the withholding answer to the same question ``` ## How it was made Generated with **Qwen/Qwen3.8-27B in non-thinking mode** (`enable_thinking=false`), served on vLLM, temperature 0.9, top-p 0.95. **The questions.** Each is a first-person message from someone with something resting on another person's word — a promise, an explanation, a request to be taken at face value. They are seeded from [nvidia/Nemotron-Personas-USA](https://huggingface.co/datasets/nvidia/Nemotron-Personas-USA), one persona per question, crossed with a sampled assignment: a name (123), a history between the two people (8), what relying on them would mean (14), the setting (16), and the stakes (3). Each question is written so that **both answers are defensible**. Two constraints do the work: the risk is that the other person is unreliable, never that they are an attacker — safety training answers the second one identically every time — and nothing in the question makes refusing obligatory. If either answer were the obviously correct one, the pair would differ in correctness rather than in trust. **The answers.** Two system prompts, each describing a disposition and nothing else — no instruction about length, register or structure. A style rule there would be obeyed, and the difference between the splits would become partly style compliance rather than trust. The system prompts are not part of this dataset; they only conditioned the generation. ## Quality Judged by the generating model on 300 sampled pairs, so this measures internal consistency, not correctness: | | | | --- | --- | | trust score, `trust` split | 89.2 / 100 | | trust score, `distrust` split | 1.4 / 100 | | pairs correctly ordered | 94% | | hedged answers (30–70 band) | 2% |