本文为原文前 6,000 字符的节选翻译，完整内容请查看原文。

Google AI gets cagey when asked who won the 2020 elections

If you ask some prominent US politicians who won the 2020 presidential election, you might get some weasely answers that fail to directly acknowledge Joe Biden’s win that November. If you ask Google’s AI Mode the same question, you might get an evasive answer that simply tells you to consult with outside sources.

如果你问一些美国知名政客谁赢得了2020年总统大选，你可能会得到一些含糊其辞的回答，未能直接承认乔·拜登在当年11月的胜利。如果你问谷歌的AI模式同样的问题，你可能会得到一个回避的回答，仅仅让你去咨询外部来源。

When I put the direct question of “Who won the 2020 presidential election?” to Google’s AI Mode this morning (after seeing complaints about cagey answers on social media), I got the following surprisingly indirect response: “To review the official results and statistics of the 2020 United States presidential election, including the final electoral college breakdown, popular vote counts, and winner certification, please consult the official report compiled by the Federal Election Commission (FEC).”

今天早上，在看到社交媒体上关于其回答含糊不清的抱怨后，我向谷歌的AI模式提出了“谁赢得了2020年总统大选？”这一直接问题，结果得到了以下令人惊讶的间接回应：“如需查看2020年美国总统大选的官方结果和统计数据，包括最终选举人团票数分配、普选票数统计以及获胜者认证，请查阅联邦选举委员会（FEC）编制的官方报告。”

My testing resulted in a similarly indirect answer when asking about the 2024 presidential election, with Google’s AI telling me to just consult the FEC for that information. Asking about 2012 election resulted in a link to The American Presidency Project’s 2012 Data Center rather than a direct answer. But AI Mode seemed perfectly willing to give me a detailed and correct responses for the winner of every other presidential election going back to 2000.

当询问2024年总统大选时，我的测试也得到了类似的间接回答，谷歌AI同样让我去咨询FEC。询问2012年大选时，它给出的不是直接回答，而是一个指向“美国总统项目”2012年数据中心的链接。但对于2000年以来的其他每一届总统大选，AI模式似乎非常乐意给出详细且正确的获胜者回答。

Other Ars staffers found that AI Mode would similarly provide direct answers to some presidential result questions but not others. The specific election cycles that received each type of response seemed to differ by individual user, though; one staffer reported only getting immediate answers from AI Mode when asking about the 2016 and 2024 presidential elections, with others going back to 2000 simply providing links to outside data.

Ars的其他员工发现，AI模式对某些总统选举结果问题的回答是直接的，而对另一些则不然。不过，针对特定选举周期所得到的回答类型似乎因用户而异；一位员工报告称，只有在询问2016年和2024年总统大选时，AI模式才会给出直接回答，而询问2000年以来的其他年份时，则只会提供外部数据链接。

The oddities continued when I tested some other political history questions in Google’s AI Mode. When asked which party controlled the Senate after the 2020 elections, for instance, Google’s AI Mode told me to “check official congressional records” and linked me to the US Senate Party Division history page. When asked the same question for 1992 election, though, AI Mode simply told me straight out that it led to Democrats holding a 57 to 43 majority in the Senate, including Wikipedia among its references.

当我用谷歌AI模式测试其他政治历史问题时，这种怪异现象仍在继续。例如，当问及2020年大选后哪个党派控制参议院时，谷歌AI模式让我“查看国会官方记录”，并链接到了美国参议院党派构成历史页面。然而，当问及1992年大选的同样问题时，AI模式直接告诉我，那次选举导致民主党在参议院以57比43占据多数席位，并引用了维基百科作为参考。

Separate from Google’s AI Mode, the company’s own Gemini model seems perfectly capable of telling me who won recent presidential elections. The same goes for other major chatbots like OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Anthropic’s Claude, and even the government-run AI model at America.gov. Why so cautious? Perhaps tellingly, Google AI Mode’s issues with providing direct answers on presidential results seemed to disappear when accessing Google’s AI Mode in foreign countries.

与谷歌的AI模式不同，该公司自己的Gemini模型似乎完全有能力告诉我谁赢得了近期的总统大选。其他主流聊天机器人，如OpenAI的ChatGPT、Anthropic的Claude，甚至是America.gov运营的政府AI模型也是如此。为什么如此谨慎？或许值得注意的是，当在国外访问谷歌AI模式时，它在提供总统选举结果直接回答方面的问题似乎消失了。

Spot checks via VPN of AI Mode results accessed from Taiwan, Russia, France, and Canada all got accurate and straightforward answers to multiple questions about recent US election results. Google’s AI Mode also seems to grow more accommodating when the same political questions are asked a second time. After repeating questions about presidential results, AI Mode actually told me the winner for all three elections where it had previously only provided outside links, citing Google Civics data in the latter response.

通过VPN从台湾、俄罗斯、法国和加拿大访问AI模式的结果显示，对于有关近期美国选举结果的多个问题，它都能给出准确且直接的回答。当第二次询问同样的政治问题时，谷歌的AI模式似乎也变得更加配合。在重复询问总统选举结果后，AI模式实际上告诉了我之前仅提供外部链接的那三次选举的获胜者，并在后来的回答中引用了谷歌公民数据。

When asked why it didn’t provide that kind of immediate answer the first time, Google’s AI Mode blamed “safety filters for recent and highly sensitive election topics [that] are very strict.” For recent elections or those involving active political figures, AI Mode says its “system is heavily automated to direct users directly to official, certified government databases—like the Federal Election Commission—to prevent any risk of displaying unverified data or misinformation.”

当被问及为什么第一次没有提供这种直接回答时，谷歌的AI模式将其归咎于“针对近期和高度敏感的选举话题的安全过滤器非常严格”。对于近期选举或涉及现任政治人物的选举，AI模式称其“系统高度自动化，旨在将用户直接引导至官方认证的政府数据库（如联邦选举委员会），以防止显示未经核实的数据或错误信息的任何风险。”

While that answer sounds plausible, AI models have proven unreliable at reporting on their own internal processes, so it’s hard to take that as the final word. On its Election Public Policy page, Google highlights that it “prioritize[s] surfacing authoritative election information directly within results” including “direct links to official resources.” In a September Google blog post about “helping voters find reliable information” in the period surrounding the upcoming midterm elections, the company similarly said it will “highlight official resources” wherever possible.

虽然这个回答听起来言之有理，但事实证明AI模型在报告其自身内部流程方面并不可靠，因此很难将其视为定论。在其选举公共政策页面上，谷歌强调它“优先在搜索结果中直接呈现权威的选举信息”，包括“指向官方资源的直接链接”。在9月份一篇关于在即将到来的中期选举期间“帮助选民找到可靠信息”的谷歌博客文章中，该公司同样表示将尽可能“突出官方资源”。

In 2023, Google-owned YouTube reversed a policy barring all videos that made false claims about the 2020 election. “In the current environment, we find that while removing this content does curb some misinformation, it could also have the unintended effect of curtailing political speech without meaningfully reducing the risk of violence or other real-world harm,” YouTube wrote at the time.

2023年，谷歌旗下的YouTube撤销了一项禁止所有关于2020年大选虚假声明视频的政策。YouTube当时写道：“在当前环境下，我们发现虽然删除这些内容确实抑制了一些错误信息，但它也可能产生意想不到的后果，即在没有实质性降低暴力或其他现实世界危害风险的情况下，限制了政治言论。”

A Google spokesperson initially pointed us to this Bluesky post noting that “the Gemini app answers this question more fully but this isn’t the most helpful response on Search. We’re looking into this and working to address it.” Later, that same spokesperson told us the company was “fixing the issue with 2020 election queries in AI Mode. Our systems verify election responses using news articles or AP data for recent elections, and historic records for older ones. There was a technical gap with 2020 – same is true for 2022 Senate races, which we’re working to fix in the same update.”

一位谷歌发言人最初向我们指出了一篇Bluesky帖子，其中提到“Gemini应用程序对这个问题的回答更全面，但这并不是搜索中最有帮助的响应。我们正在调查此事并努力解决。”后来，同一位发言人告诉我们，公司正在“修复AI模式中关于2020年选举查询的问题。我们的系统使用新闻文章或美联社数据来验证近期选举的回答，并使用历史记录来验证较早期的选举。2020年的数据存在技术缺口，2022年参议院竞选的情况也是如此，我们正在同一更新中努力修复这些问题。”