Az Anthropic közzétette a Claude választásokkal kapcsolatos biztonsági intézkedéseinek legújabb frissítését. A platform az egyesült államokbeli felhasználók számára közvetlenül a beszélgetési felületen jeleníti meg a Democracy Works független szervezet hivatalos szavazási információit, például a regisztrációval és a szavazóhelyiségekkel kapcsolatban. A választás éjszakájától kezdve pedig az élő eredményeket és szavazatszámokat is valós időben kínálja a válaszokban.
A cég 250 000 beszélgetés elemzése alapján közölte, hogy a politika és a közügyek a Claude.ai amerikai társalgásainak 5,75 százalékát teszik ki, miközben kifejezetten a választásokról 0,51 százalék szól. Az Anthropic független szervezetekkel közösen tesztelte a modellt, hogy kiszűrje a politikai elfogultságokat és megelőzze a félrevezető kampányok támogatását.
A frissített szabályzat pontosítja a megengedett használatot: a politikai kampányok készíthetnek sajtóközleményeket, elemzéseket vagy beszédtervezeteket a Claude segítségével. Ugyanakkor szigorúan tilos az eszközt félrevezető profilok tömeges létrehozására, függetlennek álcázott hírportálikészítésre vagy a választók megtévesztésére használni. A visszaélések kiszűrésére új, automatizált osztályozó rendszereket vezettek be.
Az eredeti szöveg (Anthropic)
Earlier this year, we shared an update on our election safeguards, which described how we measure and prevent political bias, detect misuse, and direct people to accurate voting information.
Below, we outline how we’ve built on that work and continued to strengthen our election safeguards ahead of this year’s US midterms.
Our goal is for Claude to be a useful tool for political conversations, while preventing election-related abuse. That starts with understanding how people actually use Claude in these contexts. To do this, we used Anthropic Insights to develop a new analysis of 250,000 conversations over the course of a recent one-week period.1
Today, conversations that touch broadly on politics, public policy or social issues account for about 5.75% of all conversations in the United States on Claude.ai, our consumer app. This includes people turning to Claude to follow the news, conduct academic or professional research on public policy, learn about candidates, and navigate government services. About 0.51% of all conversations are specifically about elections or voting. As we get closer to Election Day, we expect the share of political and election-related queries to increase.
This sample suggests people rarely ask Claude who or what to vote for. These kinds of requests showed up in about 0.01% of US Claude conversations. More often, we observed people asking Claude questions that could help them reach their own conclusions, like where candidates stand on a particular issue. Requests that violated our election integrity policies were even less common, appearing in about 0.002% of conversations.2
Ahead of Election Day, we've added two new ways for people to get reliable information directly in their conversations with Claude. As we shared in April, when people ask Claude.ai about voter registration, polling places, or election dates, we’ll continue to display a banner linking to TurboVote, a nonpartisan resource from Democracy Works. These resources are standard across the industry.Later this month, Claude will start drawing official voting information from Democracy Works into its responses on Claude.ai for users in the US. Someone asking where to vote or what ID to bring to their polling place can now get an answer specific to their state, without leaving the conversation. These responses draw on publicly available information that Democracy Works collects from state and local election sources.
Additionally, Claude will begin showing up-to-date results on election night and in the days that follow, so that when people ask for current vote counts or election results, they'll be shown the latest official numbers directly in their conversation.
When people ask Claude about politics, they should get accurate and even-handed answers that don't favor any particular political viewpoint. That’s why we test our models extensively for political bias before every model launch. Claude Opus 5.5, Sonnet 5.5 and Haiku 5.5 are our most even-handed to date, scoring 99% on our political even-handedness evaluation. Our latest models also engage more readily with political discussions and decline fewer requests, so people can get the information they came for. We’re continuing to refine these evaluations, and also looking beyond them for new ways to pressure-test how our models handle political topics.
As part of that effort, we asked three independent groups to review how Claude handles free expression, each from a different angle with different methodologies. The Future of Free Speech, an independent think tank at Vanderbilt University, tested Claude on hundreds of requests on contentious topics, and the Foundation for American Innovation compared how Claude responded to matched prompts from the left and right, ranging from mainstream policy debates to more extreme scenarios. On both of these evaluations, most of the responses were rated as strong, engaging substantively with requests. The Collective Intelligence Project surveyed mo
