Human Preferences for Constructive Interactions in Language Model Alignment

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2503.16480v1
• Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2025 15:08:41 GMT
• Title: Human Preferences for Constructive Interactions in Language Model Alignment
• Authors: Yara Kyrychenko, Jon Roozenbeek, Brandon Davidson, Sander van der Linden, Ramit Debnath,
• Abstract summary: We examined how linguistic attributes linked to constructive interactions are reflected in human preference data used for training AI.<n>We found that users consistently preferred well-reasoned and nuanced responses while rejecting those high in personal storytelling.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: As large language models (LLMs) enter the mainstream, aligning them to foster constructive dialogue rather than exacerbate societal divisions is critical. Using an individualized and multicultural alignment dataset of over 7,500 conversations of individuals from 74 countries engaging with 21 LLMs, we examined how linguistic attributes linked to constructive interactions are reflected in human preference data used for training AI. We found that users consistently preferred well-reasoned and nuanced responses while rejecting those high in personal storytelling. However, users who believed that AI should reflect their values tended to place less preference on reasoning in LLM responses and more on curiosity. Encouragingly, we observed that users could set the tone for how constructive their conversation would be, as LLMs mirrored linguistic attributes, including toxicity, in user queries.

Related papers

• LLMs syntactically adapt their language use to their conversational partner [58.92470092706263]
  It has been frequently observed that human speakers align their language use with each other during conversations. We construct a corpus of conversations between large language models (LLMs) and find that two LLM agents end up making more similar syntactic choices as conversations go on.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-10T15:37:07Z)
• ExpliCa: Evaluating Explicit Causal Reasoning in Large Language Models [75.05436691700572]
  We introduce ExpliCa, a new dataset for evaluating Large Language Models (LLMs) in explicit causal reasoning. We tested seven commercial and open-source LLMs on ExpliCa through prompting and perplexity-based metrics. Surprisingly, models tend to confound temporal relations with causal ones, and their performance is also strongly influenced by the linguistic order of the events.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-21T14:23:14Z)
• REALTALK: A 21-Day Real-World Dataset for Long-Term Conversation [51.97224538045096]
  We introduce REALTALK, a 21-day corpus of authentic messaging app dialogues. We compare EI attributes and persona consistency to understand the challenges posed by real-world dialogues. Our findings reveal that models struggle to simulate a user solely from dialogue history, while fine-tuning on specific user chats improves persona emulation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-18T20:29:01Z)
• LMLPA: Language Model Linguistic Personality Assessment [11.599282127259736]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used in everyday life and research. measuring the personality of a given LLM is currently a challenge. This paper introduces the Language Model Linguistic Personality Assessment (LMLPA), a system designed to evaluate the linguistic personalities of LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-23T07:48:51Z)
• HLB: Benchmarking LLMs' Humanlikeness in Language Use [2.438748974410787]
  We present a comprehensive humanlikeness benchmark (HLB) evaluating 20 large language models (LLMs) We collected responses from over 2,000 human participants and compared them to outputs from the LLMs in these experiments. Our results reveal fine-grained differences in how well LLMs replicate human responses across various linguistic levels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-24T09:02:28Z)
• Language Model Alignment in Multilingual Trolley Problems [138.5684081822807]
  Building on the Moral Machine experiment, we develop a cross-lingual corpus of moral dilemma vignettes in over 100 languages called MultiTP.<n>Our analysis explores the alignment of 19 different LLMs with human judgments, capturing preferences across six moral dimensions.<n>We discover significant variance in alignment across languages, challenging the assumption of uniform moral reasoning in AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-02T14:02:53Z)
• Native Design Bias: Studying the Impact of English Nativeness on Language Model Performance [3.344876133162209]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) excel at providing information acquired during pretraining on large-scale corpora. This study investigates whether the quality of LLM responses varies depending on the demographic profile of users.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-25T09:04:21Z)
• Modulating Language Model Experiences through Frictions [56.17593192325438]
  Over-consumption of language model outputs risks propagating unchecked errors in the short-term and damaging human capabilities for critical thinking in the long-term. We propose selective frictions for language model experiences, inspired by behavioral science interventions, to dampen misuse.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-24T16:31:11Z)
• LLM Agents in Interaction: Measuring Personality Consistency and Linguistic Alignment in Interacting Populations of Large Language Models [4.706971067968811]
  We create a two-group population of large language models (LLMs) agents using a simple variability-inducing sampling algorithm. We administer personality tests and submit the agents to a collaborative writing task, finding that different profiles exhibit different degrees of personality consistency and linguistic alignment to their conversational partners.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-05T11:05:20Z)
• BotChat: Evaluating LLMs' Capabilities of Having Multi-Turn Dialogues [72.65163468440434]
  This report provides a preliminary evaluation of existing large language models for human-style multi-turn chatting. We prompt large language models (LLMs) to generate a full multi-turn dialogue based on the ChatSEED, utterance by utterance. We find GPT-4 can generate human-style multi-turn dialogues with impressive quality, significantly outperforms its counterparts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-20T16:53:51Z)

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.