Morality is Non-Binary: Building a Pluralist Moral Sentence Embedding Space using Contrastive Learning

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2401.17228v1
• Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2024 18:15:25 GMT
• Title: Morality is Non-Binary: Building a Pluralist Moral Sentence Embedding Space using Contrastive Learning
• Authors: Jeongwoo Park, Enrico Liscio, Pradeep K. Murukannaiah
• Abstract summary: Pluralist moral philosophers argue that human morality can be deconstructed into a finite number of elements. We build a pluralist moral sentence embedding space via a state-of-the-art contrastive learning approach. Our results show that a pluralist approach to morality can be captured in an embedding space.
• Score: 4.925187725973777
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Recent advances in NLP show that language models retain a discernible level of knowledge in deontological ethics and moral norms. However, existing works often treat morality as binary, ranging from right to wrong. This simplistic view does not capture the nuances of moral judgment. Pluralist moral philosophers argue that human morality can be deconstructed into a finite number of elements, respecting individual differences in moral judgment. In line with this view, we build a pluralist moral sentence embedding space via a state-of-the-art contrastive learning approach. We systematically investigate the embedding space by studying the emergence of relationships among moral elements, both quantitatively and qualitatively. Our results show that a pluralist approach to morality can be captured in an embedding space. However, moral pluralism is challenging to deduce via self-supervision alone and requires a supervised approach with human labels.

Related papers

• Evaluating Moral Beliefs across LLMs through a Pluralistic Framework [22.0799438612003]
  This study introduces a novel three-module framework to evaluate the moral beliefs of four prominent large language models. We constructed a dataset containing 472 moral choice scenarios in Chinese, derived from moral words. By ranking these moral choices, we discern the varying moral beliefs held by different language models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-06T04:52:38Z)
• Decoding moral judgement from text: a pilot study [0.0]
  Moral judgement is a complex human reaction that engages cognitive and emotional dimensions. We explore the feasibility of moral judgement decoding from text stimuli with passive brain-computer interfaces.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-28T20:31:59Z)
• What Makes it Ok to Set a Fire? Iterative Self-distillation of Contexts and Rationales for Disambiguating Defeasible Social and Moral Situations [48.686872351114964]
  Moral or ethical judgments rely heavily on the specific contexts in which they occur. We introduce defeasible moral reasoning: a task to provide grounded contexts that make an action more or less morally acceptable. We distill a high-quality dataset of 1.2M entries of contextualizations and rationales for 115K defeasible moral actions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-24T00:51:29Z)
• Rethinking Machine Ethics -- Can LLMs Perform Moral Reasoning through the Lens of Moral Theories? [78.3738172874685]
  Making moral judgments is an essential step toward developing ethical AI systems. Prevalent approaches are mostly implemented in a bottom-up manner, which uses a large set of annotated data to train models based on crowd-sourced opinions about morality. This work proposes a flexible top-down framework to steer (Large) Language Models (LMs) to perform moral reasoning with well-established moral theories from interdisciplinary research.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-29T15:57:32Z)
• MoralDial: A Framework to Train and Evaluate Moral Dialogue Systems via Moral Discussions [71.25236662907056]
  A moral dialogue system aligned with users' values could enhance conversation engagement and user connections. We propose a framework, MoralDial, to train and evaluate moral dialogue systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-21T02:21:37Z)
• ClarifyDelphi: Reinforced Clarification Questions with Defeasibility Rewards for Social and Moral Situations [81.70195684646681]
  We present ClarifyDelphi, an interactive system that learns to ask clarification questions. We posit that questions whose potential answers lead to diverging moral judgments are the most informative. Our work is ultimately inspired by studies in cognitive science that have investigated the flexibility in moral cognition.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-20T16:33:09Z)
• When to Make Exceptions: Exploring Language Models as Accounts of Human Moral Judgment [96.77970239683475]
  AI systems need to be able to understand, interpret and predict human moral judgments and decisions. A central challenge for AI safety is capturing the flexibility of the human moral mind. We present a novel challenge set consisting of rule-breaking question answering.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-04T09:04:27Z)
• Does Moral Code Have a Moral Code? Probing Delphi's Moral Philosophy [5.760388205237227]
  We probe the Allen AI Delphi model with a set of standardized morality questionnaires. Despite some inconsistencies, Delphi tends to mirror the moral principles associated with the demographic groups involved in the annotation process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-25T13:37:56Z)
• Contextualized moral inference [12.574316678945195]
  We present a text-based approach that predicts people's intuitive judgment of moral vignettes. We show that a contextualized representation offers a substantial advantage over alternative representations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-25T00:34:28Z)
• Aligning AI With Shared Human Values [85.2824609130584]
  We introduce the ETHICS dataset, a new benchmark that spans concepts in justice, well-being, duties, virtues, and commonsense morality. We find that current language models have a promising but incomplete ability to predict basic human ethical judgements. Our work shows that progress can be made on machine ethics today, and it provides a steppingstone toward AI that is aligned with human values.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-05T17:59:16Z)
• Text-based inference of moral sentiment change [11.188112005462536]
  We present a text-based framework for investigating moral sentiment change of the public via longitudinal corpora. We build our methodology by exploring moral biases learned from diachronic word embeddings. Our work offers opportunities for applying natural language processing toward characterizing moral sentiment change in society.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-01-20T18:52:45Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.