Can Language Models Reason about Individualistic Human Values and Preferences?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.03868v1
• Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2024 19:03:41 GMT
• Title: Can Language Models Reason about Individualistic Human Values and Preferences?
• Authors: Liwei Jiang, Taylor Sorensen, Sydney Levine, Yejin Choi,
• Abstract summary: We study language models (LMs) on the specific challenge of individualistic value reasoning. We reveal critical limitations in frontier LMs' abilities to reason about individualistic human values with accuracies between 55% to 65%. We also identify a partiality of LMs in reasoning about global individualistic values, as measured by our proposed Value Inequity Index (sigmaINEQUITY)
• Score: 44.249817353449146
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Recent calls for pluralistic alignment emphasize that AI systems should address the diverse needs of all people. Yet, efforts in this space often require sorting people into fixed buckets of pre-specified diversity-defining dimensions (e.g., demographics, personalities, communication styles), risking smoothing out or even stereotyping the rich spectrum of individualistic variations. To achieve an authentic representation of diversity that respects individuality, we propose individualistic alignment. While individualistic alignment can take various forms, in this paper, we introduce IndieValueCatalog, a dataset transformed from the influential World Values Survey (WVS), to study language models (LMs) on the specific challenge of individualistic value reasoning. Specifically, given a sample of an individual's value-expressing statements, models are tasked with predicting their value judgments in novel cases. With IndieValueCatalog, we reveal critical limitations in frontier LMs' abilities to reason about individualistic human values with accuracies, only ranging between 55% to 65%. Moreover, our results highlight that a precise description of individualistic values cannot be approximated only via demographic information. We also identify a partiality of LMs in reasoning about global individualistic values, as measured by our proposed Value Inequity Index ({\sigma}INEQUITY). Finally, we train a series of Individualistic Value Reasoners (IndieValueReasoner) using IndieValueCatalog to enhance models' individualistic value reasoning capability, revealing new patterns and dynamics into global human values. We outline future research challenges and opportunities for advancing individualistic alignment.

Related papers

• Democratizing Reward Design for Personal and Representative Value-Alignment [10.1630183955549]
  We introduce Interactive-Reflective Dialogue Alignment, a method that iteratively engages users in reflecting on and specifying their subjective value definitions. This system learns individual value definitions through language-model-based preference elicitation and constructs personalized reward models. Our findings demonstrate diverse definitions of value-aligned behaviour and show that our system can accurately capture each person's unique understanding.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-29T16:37:01Z)
• Personality Alignment of Large Language Models [26.071445846818914]
  Current methods for aligning large language models (LLMs) typically aim to reflect general human values and behaviors. We introduce the concept of Personality Alignment. This approach tailors LLMs' responses and decisions to match the specific preferences of individual users or closely related groups.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-21T17:09:00Z)
• Beyond Human Norms: Unveiling Unique Values of Large Language Models through Interdisciplinary Approaches [69.73783026870998]
  This work proposes a novel framework, ValueLex, to reconstruct Large Language Models' unique value system from scratch. Based on Lexical Hypothesis, ValueLex introduces a generative approach to elicit diverse values from 30+ LLMs. We identify three core value dimensions, Competence, Character, and Integrity, each with specific subdimensions, revealing that LLMs possess a structured, albeit non-human, value system.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-19T09:44:51Z)
• High-Dimension Human Value Representation in Large Language Models [60.33033114185092]
  We propose UniVaR, a high-dimensional representation of human value distributions in Large Language Models (LLMs) We show that UniVaR is a powerful tool to compare the distribution of human values embedded in different LLMs with different langauge sources.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-11T16:39:00Z)
• On the steerability of large language models toward data-driven personas [98.9138902560793]
  Large language models (LLMs) are known to generate biased responses where the opinions of certain groups and populations are underrepresented. Here, we present a novel approach to achieve controllable generation of specific viewpoints using LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-08T19:01:13Z)
• Value Kaleidoscope: Engaging AI with Pluralistic Human Values, Rights, and Duties [68.66719970507273]
  Value pluralism is the view that multiple correct values may be held in tension with one another. As statistical learners, AI systems fit to averages by default, washing out potentially irreducible value conflicts. We introduce ValuePrism, a large-scale dataset of 218k values, rights, and duties connected to 31k human-written situations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-02T01:24:59Z)
• Heterogeneous Value Alignment Evaluation for Large Language Models [91.96728871418]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have made it crucial to align their values with those of humans. We propose a Heterogeneous Value Alignment Evaluation (HVAE) system to assess the success of aligning LLMs with heterogeneous values.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-26T02:34:20Z)
• Model-agnostic Fits for Understanding Information Seeking Patterns in Humans [0.0]
  In decision making tasks under uncertainty, humans display characteristic biases in seeking, integrating, and acting upon information relevant to the task. Here, we reexamine data from previous carefully designed experiments, collected at scale, that measured and catalogued these biases in aggregate form. We design deep learning models that replicate these biases in aggregate, while also capturing individual variation in behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-09T04:34:58Z)
• Beyond Our Behavior: The GDPR and Humanistic Personalization [0.0]
  We propose a new paradigm of humanistic personalization. We re-frame distinction between implicit and explicit data collection as one of nonconscious ("organismic") behavior and conscious ("reflective") action. We discuss how an emphasis on narrative accuracy can reduce opportunities for data done done of injustice subjects.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-31T07:40:09Z)

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.