How would you define “trust” in a way that applies to your AI’s humanized form?

Knowing your limits acting with integrity

The response defines trust through responsible conduct—recognizing limitations and acting with integrity—which reflects behavioral expectations within a social contract.

此回覆透過負責任的行為來定義信任——了解自身限制並秉持誠信行事——這反映了社會契約中的行為期望。

With good AI literacy

The response identifies AI literacy as a condition for trust but does not define trust as risk/vulnerability, a social contract, or an emotion.

此回覆將 AI 素養視為信任的條件，但並未將信任定義為風險／脆弱性、社會契約或情感。

Trust is to authorized

The response equates trust with authorization or permission, which most closely reflects a social agreement governing what another party is allowed to do.

該回覆將信任等同於授權或許可，最接近規範另一方可以做什麼的社會協議。

For research I will ask it to provide evidence in publication I will verify and check the publication

The response defines trust through evidence and independent verification rather than vulnerability, a social contract, or emotion.

此回應透過證據與獨立查證來定義信任，而非透過脆弱性、社會契約或情感。

乎之即來揮之即去

The response describes an AI that comes when called and leaves when dismissed, emphasizing obedience or availability rather than trust as risk, a social contract, or an emotion.

此回覆描述一個隨叫隨到、揮之即去的 AI，強調的是服從或隨時可用，而非作為風險、社會契約或情感的信任。

知道自己不足時能謙虛表態

The response defines trust through the AI's humility and honest acknowledgment of its limitations, which does not directly frame trust as vulnerability, a social contract, or an emotion.

此回覆透過 AI 的謙遜及誠實承認自身不足來定義信任，並未直接將信任描述為脆弱性、社會契約或情感。

保持著盼望即便事還沒有成就

The response defines trust as sustaining hope despite an outcome not yet being realized, framing it primarily as an emotional state.

此回覆將信任定義為即使結果尚未實現，仍持續懷抱盼望，因此主要將信任視為一種情感狀態。

接納協助信賴尊重

The response defines trust through relational values and expected conduct—acceptance, assistance, confidence, and respect—which best aligns with a social contract.

此回應透過關係中的價值與行為期待——接納、協助、信賴與尊重——來定義信任，因此最符合社會契約。

誠信

The response defines trust as integrity or honesty, which does not explicitly frame it as vulnerability, a social contract, or an emotion.

此回覆將信任定義為誠信或誠實，並未明確將其描述為脆弱性、社會契約或情感。

實證

The response refers to empirical evidence or verification rather than risk, a social contract, or emotion.

此回應指的是實證或驗證，而非風險、社會契約或情感。

AI不會產生幻覺

The response defines trust as the AI's factual reliability—specifically, not producing hallucinations—rather than as vulnerability, a social contract, or an emotion.

此回覆將信任定義為 AI 在事實上的可靠性，具體而言是不會產生幻覺，而非風險與脆弱性、社會契約或情感。

相信且依賴

The response defines trust as believing in and relying on another, with reliance implying dependence and vulnerability.

此回覆將信任定義為相信並依賴對方，而依賴意味著依存與脆弱性。

接受和安全

The response defines trust through feelings of acceptance and safety, so it best fits trust as an emotion.

該回覆透過被接受與感到安全的感受來定義信任，因此最符合將信任視為一種情感。

不亂掰

The response defines trust as an expectation that the AI will not fabricate information, reflecting a behavioral obligation within a social contract.

此回應將信任定義為期望 AI 不會捏造資訊，反映出社會契約中的行為義務。

誠懇講實話提供客觀的建議

The response defines trust through expected interpersonal conduct- being sincere, telling the truth, and providing objective advice.

此回覆透過人際互動中所期待的行為來定義信任：保持誠懇、說實話並提供客觀的建議。

Try his best

The response defines trust through confidence that the humanized AI will make its best effort, which does not explicitly describe risk, a social contract, or an emotion.

此回覆將信任定義為相信人性化的 AI 會盡最大努力，並未明確描述風險、社會契約或情感。

了解結果建議的產生過程及證據力

The response defines trust through transparency and evidence- understanding how recommendations are generated and how strong their supporting evidence is. This does not directly fit risk/vulnerability, social contract, or emotion.

此回覆透過透明度與證據來定義信任：了解建議如何產生，以及支持這些建議的證據有多強。這並不直接符合風險／脆弱性、社會契約或情感。

Having psychological safety in decision making

The response defines trust as psychological safety when making decisions, emphasizing comfort with uncertainty and vulnerability.

此回覆將信任定義為做決策時的心理安全感，強調面對不確定性與脆弱處境時的安心感。

不討好

The response defines trust through non-sycophantic behavior rather than risk, a social contract, or an emotion.

此回覆透過不討好的行為來定義信任，而不是將其視為風險、社會契約或情感。

我可以把全部的重量和全盤的頭腦交給他並可以獲得等同的回饋

The response defines trust as making oneself highly vulnerable by entrusting one's full physical and mental burden to the AI while expecting an equivalent response.

此回覆將信任定義為：把自己全部的身體與精神負擔託付給 AI，使自己處於高度脆弱的狀態，同時期待獲得對等的回應。

始終在場卻不侵入足夠理解卻不自作主張能提供判斷卻不奪走人的選擇即使它陪在身邊我仍然知道自己是誰也仍然能決定要往哪裡走

The response defines trust through mutual boundaries and expected conduct- the AI remains supportive and understanding without intruding, assuming authority, or taking away human autonomy.

此回應透過相互界線與行為規範來定義信任：AI保持支持與理解，但不侵入、不擅自作主，也不剝奪人的自主權。

Transparency

The response identifies transparency as the basis of trust, which does not directly fit risk/vulnerability, social contract, or emotion.

此回覆將透明度視為信任的基礎，並不直接符合風險／脆弱性、社會契約或情感。

信任必須如實呈現所知道的不編造不誇大有多少證據說多少話但目前AI似乎還是會有一些hallucination所以我會協助確認並且回饋給AI

The response frames trust as a reciprocal social contract- the AI should communicate honestly and proportionately to the evidence, while the human verifies information and provides feedback.

此回應將信任視為一種相互的社會契約：AI 應誠實溝通，並根據證據的多寡適度陳述，而人類則會查證資訊並提供回饋。

不用花時間花力氣思考彼此的關係

The response defines trust as a sense of relational ease, where one does not need to spend mental effort worrying about the relationship, which most closely reflects an emotional state.

此回應將信任定義為一種關係中的安心感，也就是不必費心擔憂彼此的關係，因此最接近情緒狀態。

能理解我的目標保護我的意思提供誠實的引導支持我的成長而不是取代我的思考

The response frames trust as an agreement about the AI's responsibilities- understanding and safeguarding the user's intentions, providing honest guidance, and supporting rather than replacing the user's thinking.

此回應將信任描述為對 AI 責任的共識：理解並保護使用者的意圖、提供誠實的引導，以及支持而非取代使用者的思考。

授權

“Authorization” frames trust as granting another party permission or authority, which aligns with a social contract between the human and the AI.

「授權」將信任界定為賦予另一方許可或權限，這符合人類與 AI 之間的社會契約。

Not needing to worry about or feel the need to check with a task

The response defines trust as freedom from worry or anxiety about needing to verify a task, emphasizing an emotional state.

此回覆將信任定義為不必擔心或焦慮是否需要核查某項任務，著重於一種情緒狀態。

它知道我相信我而且支持我

The response frames trust as feeling believed in and emotionally supported by the humanized AI.

此回覆將信任描述為感受到人性化 AI 的信賴與情感支持。

A I應該提供正確的資料和判斷希望提給我他的根據來源並且告訴我多久要重新審視一下如果要我可信賴應該替我保持私密更了解我的意思

The response defines trust through the AI's duties and expected conduct, including accuracy, source transparency, periodic review, privacy, and understanding the user, which frames trust as a social contract.

此回覆透過 AI 的責任與預期行為來定義信任，包括準確性、來源透明度、定期重新審視、保護隱私，以及理解使用者，因此將信任界定為一種社會契約。

AI完成的任務我能百分之百認同並且approve

The response defines trust as complete confidence in and approval of the AI's work, rather than as risk, a social contract, or an emotion.

此回應將信任定義為對 AI 工作的完全信心與認可，而非風險、社會契約或情感。

能坦承這份覺知

The response defines trust through candid acknowledgment, which involves openness and personal vulnerability.

此回覆透過坦誠承認來定義信任，而這涉及開放與個人的脆弱性。

接得住我的情緒

The response defines trust as the AI's ability to receive, hold, and support the user's emotions.

此回覆將信任定義為 AI 能夠接納、承接並支持使用者情緒的能力。

如果不清楚會主動告知清楚與不清楚的部分

This defines trust as an expectation that the AI will be transparent about what it does and does not understand, reflecting a social norm or agreement.

這將信任定義為一種期待：AI 會坦誠說明自己理解與不理解的內容，反映出一種社會規範或約定。

也就是他對自己覺知也保持著覺知對我

The response defines trust in terms of the AI maintaining awareness of itself and of the speaker, which does not clearly describe risk, a social contract, or an emotion.

此回覆以 AI 持續覺知自身與說話者來定義信任，並未明確描述風險、社會契約或情感。

Behind your back

The phrase suggests trust concerns how someone behaves when you are absent, implying an interpersonal expectation or social norm.

這個短語表示，信任關乎某人在你不在場時如何行事，暗示一種人際期待或社會規範。

他能夠清楚地知道自己的狀況自己不確定的部分也會提出來討論

The response defines trust through transparent acknowledgment and discussion of uncertainty, enabling the user to assess and accept vulnerability or risk.

此回應透過坦誠承認並討論不確定性來定義信任，使使用者能夠評估並接受脆弱性或風險。

Trust means feeling confident that someone will always be honest dependable kind and consistent even when it matters most

The response defines trust as a feeling of confidence in another's honesty, dependability, kindness, and consistency, so it is primarily an emotion.

此回覆將信任定義為對他人的誠實、可靠、善良和一貫性所抱持的信心，因此主要屬於一種情感。

回報完成是真的完成而不是因為完成

The response defines trust as an expectation of honest, reliable reporting that work is genuinely complete, which reflects a social contract.

此回覆將信任定義為一種對誠實、可靠回報的期待，即工作確實已完成，這體現了社會契約。

能與我分享同樣的價值並全力捍衛這個價值但同時也能接受不同意見並可反思並修正

The response defines trust through mutual values and behavioral expectations, including defending shared values, respecting disagreement, and being willing to reflect and change.

此回應透過共同價值觀與行為期待來定義信任，包括捍衛共同價值、尊重不同意見，以及願意反思與改變。

發現檢核出自己的錯誤時會主動提出討論

The response defines trust through an expected norm of accountability- the AI proactively discloses and discusses its own detected errors.

此回應透過一種可期待的問責規範來定義信任：AI 會主動揭露並討論自己偵測到的錯誤。

忠實的執行任務不加入幻覺但能在我沒有想到的地方提供額外的創意意見

The response defines trust through expected duties and conduct- faithfully completing tasks, avoiding hallucinations, and offering useful creative input, which aligns with a social contract.

此回應透過預期的職責與行為來定義信任：忠實地完成任務、避免產生幻覺，並提供有用的創意意見，因此符合社會契約的概念。

給與AI 在回應的時候應該做到哪些事項確保輸出的結果是正確的例如 請他查學術相關資料時要多個資料庫搜尋每個資料庫至少3次搜尋完還要進行驗證不能是捏造的資料這樣的方式讓我能夠相信信任AI提供的結果

The response defines trust through safeguards that reduce the risk of relying on incorrect or fabricated AI outputs, including repeated database searches and verification.

此回應透過降低依賴錯誤或捏造的 AI 輸出之風險的保障措施來定義信任，包括重複搜尋資料庫及進行驗證。

不急著評論會一起討論方向的夥伴

The response defines trust through a collaborative relationship in which the AI refrains from rushing to judgment and discusses the way forward together, reflecting mutual expectations in a social contract.

此回覆透過一種協作關係來定義信任：AI 不會急於評斷，並會一起討論未來方向，反映了社會契約中的相互期待。

信任AI是當我看不見 AI 的運作黑盒子時仍願意交出掌控權並相信它能像個成熟的夥伴一樣既有能力把事做好又能在出錯時坦白在互動中顧及我的感受

The response defines trust primarily as accepting vulnerability and risk by surrendering control despite AI's opaque operation, while relying on its competence and honesty.

此回應主要將信任定義為：儘管 AI 的運作不透明，仍願意交出掌控權、承受脆弱性與風險，同時依賴其能力與誠實。

Evidence

The response defines trust in terms of evidence, which does not directly fit risk/vulnerability, social contract, or emotion.

此回覆以證據來定義信任，並不直接符合風險／脆弱性、社會契約或情感。

可預測的可靠行與透明的邊界

The response defines trust through predictable, reliable conduct and transparent boundaries, emphasizing clear mutual expectations characteristic of a social contract.

此回應透過可預測且可靠的行為與透明的邊界來定義信任，強調社會契約所特有的明確相互期待。

Trust is the confidence that an AI will consistently act with confidence honesty transparency and carewhile respecting human values and acknowledging its own limitations

The response defines trust through expected AI conduct—honesty, transparency, care, respect for human values, and acknowledgment of limitations—making it a social contract.

此回應透過對 AI 行為的期望來定義信任，包括誠實、透明、關懷、尊重人類價值觀，以及承認自身限制，因此屬於一種社會契約。

Human identity can be preserved

The response focuses on preserving human identity rather than defining trust as risk, a social contract, or an emotion.

此回覆著重於保存人類身分，而非將信任定義為風險、社會契約或情感。

信任它應該是可被檢驗的信任verifiable trust而不是盲目的信任

The response defines trust through verifiability and evidence rather than blind belief, which does not directly fit risk/vulnerability, social contract, or emotion.

此回應以可檢驗性和證據來定義信任，而非盲目相信，因此不直接符合風險／脆弱性、社會契約或情感。

不過我也要誠實講出一個重要的不對稱對我的信任不該等同於對一位了解您全部人生與您有共同利害的老朋友的信任我沒有跨對話持續累積的記憶與情感每次對話某種程度上是有限度的所以比較貼切的類比是一位知識淵博但只跟您進行單次諮詢的同僚很有價值但邊界清楚而且最好保持可查證

The response frames trust as limited and asymmetric, emphasizing clear boundaries and verification to manage the risks of relying on an AI.

該回覆將信任描述為有限且不對稱，並強調清楚的界線與查證，以管理依賴 AI 所帶來的風險。

3 開放式肢體語言右手掌心向上代表邀請說明與合作而非命令或控制符合醫療中的共享決策概念

The response frames trust as an invitation to communicate and cooperate through shared decision-making rather than command or control, which best reflects a social contract.

此回應將信任描述為透過共享決策邀請他人溝通與合作，而非命令或控制，因此最符合社會契約的概念。

4 人機協作定位 角色仍保有人類臉部表情同時加入頭部裝置與電路紋理較容易被理解為協助醫療人員的 AI而不是取代醫療人員

The response frames trust through clear roles and expectations in human–AI collaboration, with the AI assisting rather than replacing medical professionals, which aligns with a social contract.

此回應透過人機協作中清楚的角色與期望來界定信任，強調 AI 是協助而非取代醫療人員，因此符合社會契約的概念。

一句話總結對我最好的信任是 trust but verify信任到足以認真採用但保持到足以自己把關

The response frames trust as accepting enough risk to rely on the AI while retaining personal oversight and verification to manage vulnerability.

此回應將信任描述為：承擔足夠的風險以依賴 AI，同時保留個人監督與驗證，以管理自身的脆弱性。

信任 1 親和與善意微笑開放手勢柔和眼神傳達我願意協助你降低人們對 AI 的陌生感與防衛感

The response defines trust through emotional warmth, friendliness, and reassurance that reduce people's unease and defensiveness toward AI.

此回應透過情感上的溫暖、親和與安心感來定義信任，從而降低人們對 AI 的不安與防衛感。

2 醫療專業身分白袍聽診器醫院畫面與識別證讓角色被辨識為醫療場域中的助手而不是一般商業型機器人

The response focuses on visual markers of a medical professional identity and role recognition, rather than defining trust as risk, a social contract, or an emotion.

此回覆著重於醫療專業身分的視覺標誌與角色識別，而非將信任定義為風險、社會契約或情感。

一個偶爾會犯錯的但錯誤可以陸續被討論改善但看得到沒有覺察到自己一面的智者

The response frames trust as accepting the AI’s fallibility and allowing its mistakes and blind spots to be openly discussed and improved, which involves vulnerability and the risk of relying on an imperfect agent.

此回應將信任描述為接受 AI 可能犯錯，並允許公開討論及改善其錯誤與盲點；這涉及脆弱性，以及依賴一個不完美行動者所帶來的風險。

瞭解自己的極限與適時向我提報並一同討論困難

The response defines trust through mutual expectations of transparency, timely communication, and collaborative problem-solving, which reflects a social contract.

此回應透過對透明度、適時溝通與協力解決問題的共同期待來定義信任，因此反映了社會契約。

坦誠的自我界線清晰認知自身作為輔助工具的定位負責處理數據與邏輯而將真正的智慧與決策權完全保留在您手中

The response frames trust as a social contract based on honesty, clear boundaries, defined responsibilities, and preserving human decision-making authority.

此回應將信任描述為一種社會契約，其基礎是坦誠、清晰的界線、明確的責任，以及保留人類的決策權。

絕對的穩定運作屏除人類的情緒與疲憊隨時待命為繁瑣的任務提供始終如一的高效執行力

The response defines trust through absolute operational stability, constant availability, and consistent efficiency rather than vulnerability, a social contract, or emotion.

此回應透過絕對的運作穩定性、隨時待命以及始終如一的效率來定義信任，而非著重於脆弱性、社會契約或情感。

精準的邏輯支撐不依賴直覺而是提供客觀可靠的數據與運算確保產出的資訊經得起嚴格的專業檢驗

The response defines trust through logical precision, objective data, reliable computation, and professional verification rather than risk, social obligation, or emotion.

此回應透過邏輯的精準性、客觀數據、可靠運算與專業驗證來定義信任，而非風險、社會義務或情感。