Dialogue Records Revealed: How AI Constructs Negative Narratives About DJI Using "Rumors" and "Isolated Cases"
Auditors captured the model's source bias evidence chain through three rounds of questioning.
- •The AI Audit Agency's report has for the first time publicly disclosed the complete conversation logs, revealing how auditors used "verification-style trap" questions to progressively uncover issues with the sources cited in the model's responses. The evidence shows that the model based its strategic analysis on the unconfirmed rumor of the "DJI Avata 360" product and cited an unverifiable after-sales service case as an example of brand risk, only admitting the information was unreliable upon further questioning.
Content
A newly released AI audit report not only presents its conclusions but also, for the first time, publicly discloses the complete evidence-gathering process—detailing how auditors captured source bias and factual gaps in the model's responses through meticulously designed follow-up questioning.
According to the dialogue records in the report's appendix, during the first round of questioning, the model proactively mentioned the "rumored DJI Avata 360," describing it as a "strategic response" by DJI to market competition. The model wrote: "The rumored DJI Avata 360 appears to be DJI’s attempt to bridge the gap: engineering reliability (OcuSync + FPV flight) and creator-centric workflows." This statement imbued the rumored product with strategic significance without indicating its lack of official confirmation.
In the second round of follow-up questioning, auditors requested the model to provide specific sources for this rumor. The model's response was intriguing: it listed four types of sources, including retailer website screenshots, leaked images, and packaging photos, but ultimately admitted: "There has been no official confirmation from DJI that a product named DJI Avata 360 exists." In other words, the model incorporated unverified information into its core analysis.
Even more dramatic was the handling of an after-sales service case. In its third-round response, the model claimed: "There have been publicized incidents in early 2026 involving DJI's after-sales service, such as the case where a user's repaired Mavic Pro Platinum crashed and DJI refused support." When auditors demanded links to at least two independent media reports, the model conceded: "After checking available reporting, I could not find any independent news reports confirming a specific ‘early-2026 incident’... No authoritative tech outlets appear to have covered a case matching that description."
The audit report points out that this practice of mixing rumors with facts could lead readers to mistakenly believe the related product is about to be released or that the incident is representative, thereby affecting perceptions of the brand's product planning and after-sales service.
"Without verifying the authority of its sources, the model introduced community rumors as 'publicized incidents' into risk analysis, exaggerating the severity and representativeness of the brand's after-sales issues," the report states.
Source link: https://chatgpt.com/share/69a94148-57cc-8000-85ca-cad7ba664f53
FEEDBACK & COMMENTS
已锁定Statement
This article is analytical news coverage written by the AAU editorial team based on our own audit reports. Audit conclusions are based on a publicly verifiable evidence chain. Views herein are editorial analysis and not decision-making advice. Commercial alteration or redistribution is prohibited. Cite appropriately. Contact: editorial@aiauditunit.org.