The Moral Mind(s) of Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2412.04476v2
• Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2025 10:35:02 GMT
• Title: The Moral Mind(s) of Large Language Models
• Authors: Avner Seror,
• Abstract summary: Key questions arise as large language models (LLMs) become integrated into decision-making across various sectors. We present approximately forty models from major providers with a structured set of ethical scenarios. Our rationality tests revealed that at least one model from each provider exhibited behavior consistent with approximately stable moral principles.
• Score: 0.0
• License:
• Abstract: As large language models (LLMs) become integrated into decision-making across various sectors, key questions arise: do they exhibit an emergent "moral mind" - a consistent set of moral principles guiding their ethical judgments - and is this reasoning uniform or diverse across models? To investigate this, we presented approximately forty models from major providers with a structured set of ethical scenarios, creating one of the largest datasets of its kind. Our rationality tests revealed that at least one model from each provider exhibited behavior consistent with approximately stable moral principles, effectively acting as if nearly optimizing a utility function encoding ethical reasoning. We estimated these utility functions and found that models tend to cluster around neutral ethical stances. To further characterize moral heterogeneity, we applied a non-parametric permutation approach, constructing a probabilistic similarity network based on revealed preference patterns. This analysis showed that while approximately rational models share a core ethical structure, differences emerged: roughly half displayed greater moral adaptability, bridging diverse perspectives, while the remainder adhered to more rigid ethical structures.

Related papers

• Analyzing the Ethical Logic of Six Large Language Models [1.119697400073873]
  This study examines the ethical reasoning of six prominent generative large language models: OpenAI GPT-4o, Meta LLaMA 3.1, Perplexity, Anthropic Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Google Gemini, and Mistral 7B. Findings reveal that LLMs exhibit largely convergent ethical logic, marked by a rationalist, consequentialist emphasis, with decisions often prioritizing harm and fairness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-15T16:56:26Z)
• Large-scale moral machine experiment on large language models [0.0]
  We evaluate moral judgments across 52 different Large Language Models (LLMs) in autonomous driving scenarios. proprietary models and open-source models exceeding 10 billion parameters demonstrated relatively close alignment with human judgments. However, model updates did not consistently improve alignment with human preferences, and many LLMs showed excessive emphasis on specific ethical principles.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-11T08:36:49Z)
• Exploring and steering the moral compass of Large Language Models [55.2480439325792]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have become central to advancing automation and decision-making across various sectors. This study proposes a comprehensive comparative analysis of the most advanced LLMs to assess their moral profiles.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-27T16:49:22Z)
• Boosting the Power of Small Multimodal Reasoning Models to Match Larger Models with Self-Consistency Training [49.3242278912771]
  Multimodal reasoning is a challenging task that requires models to reason across multiple modalities to answer questions. Existing approaches have made progress by incorporating language and visual modalities into a two-stage reasoning framework. We propose MC-CoT, a self-consistency training strategy that generates multiple rationales and answers, subsequently selecting the most accurate through a voting process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-23T17:09:48Z)
• Unpacking the Ethical Value Alignment in Big Models [46.560886177083084]
  This paper provides an overview of the risks and challenges associated with big models, surveys existing AI ethics guidelines, and examines the ethical implications arising from the limitations of these models. We introduce a novel conceptual paradigm for aligning the ethical values of big models and discuss promising research directions for alignment criteria, evaluation, and method.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-26T16:45:40Z)
• 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)
• Modeling Moral Choices in Social Dilemmas with Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning [4.2050490361120465]
  A bottom-up learning approach may be more appropriate for studying and developing ethical behavior in AI agents. We present a systematic analysis of the choices made by intrinsically-motivated RL agents whose rewards are based on moral theories. We analyze the impact of different types of morality on the emergence of cooperation, defection or exploitation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-20T09:36:42Z)
• Are Neural Topic Models Broken? [81.15470302729638]
  We study the relationship between automated and human evaluation of topic models. We find that neural topic models fare worse in both respects compared to an established classical method.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-28T14:38:50Z)
• Scruples: A Corpus of Community Ethical Judgments on 32,000 Real-Life Anecdotes [72.64975113835018]
  Motivated by descriptive ethics, we investigate a novel, data-driven approach to machine ethics. We introduce Scruples, the first large-scale dataset with 625,000 ethical judgments over 32,000 real-life anecdotes. Our dataset presents a major challenge to state-of-the-art neural language models, leaving significant room for improvement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-20T17:34:15Z)

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.