Wide Reflective Equilibrium in LLM Alignment: Bridging Moral Epistemology and AI Safety

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2506.00415v1
• Date: Sat, 31 May 2025 06:40:59 GMT
• Title: Wide Reflective Equilibrium in LLM Alignment: Bridging Moral Epistemology and AI Safety
• Authors: Matthew Brophy,
• Abstract summary: This paper argues that the Method of Wide Reflective Equilibrium (MWRE) offers a uniquely apt framework for understanding current AI alignment efforts.<n>MWRE emphasizes the achievement of coherence between our considered moral judgments, guiding moral principles, and relevant background theories.<n>The paper demonstrates that MWRE serves as a valuable foundational for critically analyzing current alignment efforts and for guiding the future development of more ethically sound and justifiably aligned AI systems.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: As large language models (LLMs) become more powerful and pervasive across society, ensuring these systems are beneficial, safe, and aligned with human values is crucial. Current alignment techniques, like Constitutional AI (CAI), involve complex iterative processes. This paper argues that the Method of Wide Reflective Equilibrium (MWRE) -- a well-established coherentist moral methodology -- offers a uniquely apt framework for understanding current LLM alignment efforts. Moreover, this methodology can substantively augment these processes by providing concrete pathways for improving their dynamic revisability, procedural legitimacy, and overall ethical grounding. Together, these enhancements can help produce more robust and ethically defensible outcomes. MWRE, emphasizing the achievement of coherence between our considered moral judgments, guiding moral principles, and relevant background theories, arguably better represents the intricate reality of LLM alignment and offers a more robust path to justification than prevailing foundationalist models or simplistic input-output evaluations. While current methods like CAI bear a structural resemblance to MWRE, they often lack its crucial emphasis on dynamic, bi-directional revision of principles and the procedural legitimacy derived from such a process. While acknowledging various disanalogies (e.g., consciousness, genuine understanding in LLMs), the paper demonstrates that MWRE serves as a valuable heuristic for critically analyzing current alignment efforts and for guiding the future development of more ethically sound and justifiably aligned AI systems.

Related papers

• Alignment and Safety in Large Language Models: Safety Mechanisms, Training Paradigms, and Emerging Challenges [47.14342587731284]
  This survey provides a comprehensive overview of alignment techniques, training protocols, and empirical findings in large language models (LLMs) alignment.<n>We analyze the development of alignment methods across diverse paradigms, characterizing the fundamental trade-offs between core alignment objectives.<n>We discuss state-of-the-art techniques, including Direct Preference Optimization (DPO), Constitutional AI, brain-inspired methods, and alignment uncertainty quantification (AUQ)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-25T20:52:58Z)
• Revisiting LLM Reasoning via Information Bottleneck [57.519119962528166]
  Large language models (LLMs) have recently demonstrated remarkable progress in reasoning capabilities through reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR)<n>We present a theoretical characterization of LLM reasoning grounded in information bottleneck (IB) principle.<n>We propose IB-aware reasoning optimization (IBRO), a framework that encourages reasoning trajectories to be both informative about the final correct answer and generalizable.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-24T13:14:25Z)
• The Staircase of Ethics: Probing LLM Value Priorities through Multi-Step Induction to Complex Moral Dilemmas [20.792208554628367]
  We introduce the Multi-step Moral Dilemmas dataset to evaluate the evolving moral judgments of LLMs across 3,302 five-stage dilemmas.<n>This framework enables a fine-grained, dynamic analysis of how LLMs adjust their moral reasoning across escalating dilemmas.<n>Our findings call for a shift toward dynamic, context-aware evaluation paradigms, paving the way for more human-aligned and value-sensitive development of LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-23T17:59:50Z)
• LLM Ethics Benchmark: A Three-Dimensional Assessment System for Evaluating Moral Reasoning in Large Language Models [8.018569128518187]
  This study establishes a novel framework for systematically evaluating the moral reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs)<n>Our framework addresses this challenge by quantifying alignment with human ethical standards through three dimensions.<n>This approach enables precise identification of ethical strengths and weaknesses in LLMs, facilitating targeted improvements and stronger alignment with societal values.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-01T20:36:19Z)
• The Convergent Ethics of AI? Analyzing Moral Foundation Priorities in Large Language Models with a Multi-Framework Approach [6.0972634521845475]
  This paper introduces the Priorities in Reasoning and Intrinsic Moral Evaluation (PRIME) framework.<n>PRIME is a comprehensive methodology for analyzing moral priorities across foundational ethical dimensions.<n>We apply this framework to six leading large language models (LLMs) through a dual-protocol approach.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-27T14:26:48Z)
• Causality Is Key to Understand and Balance Multiple Goals in Trustworthy ML and Foundation Models [91.24296813969003]
  This paper advocates integrating causal methods into machine learning to navigate the trade-offs among key principles of trustworthy ML.<n>We argue that a causal approach is essential for balancing multiple competing objectives in both trustworthy ML and foundation models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-28T14:57:33Z)
• Societal Alignment Frameworks Can Improve LLM Alignment [50.97852062232431]
  We argue that improving LLM alignment requires incorporating insights from societal alignment frameworks.<n>We then investigate how uncertainty within societal alignment frameworks manifests in LLM alignment.<n>We end our discussion by offering an alternative view on LLM alignment, framing the underspecified nature of its objectives as an opportunity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-27T13:26:07Z)
• Addressing Moral Uncertainty using Large Language Models for Ethical Decision-Making [0.0]
  We present an ethical decision-making framework that refines a pre-trained reinforcement learning (RL) model using a task-agnostic ethical layer.<n>An ethical layer aggregates belief scores from multiple moral perspectives using Belief Jensen-Shannon Divergence and Dempster-Shafer Theory into probability scores that also serve as the shaping reward.<n>This integrated learning framework helps the RL agent navigate moral uncertainty in complex environments and enables it to make morally sound decisions across diverse tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-17T19:05:55Z)
• A Survey on Large Language Models for Critical Societal Domains: Finance, Healthcare, and Law [65.87885628115946]
  Large language models (LLMs) are revolutionizing the landscapes of finance, healthcare, and law. We highlight the instrumental role of LLMs in enhancing diagnostic and treatment methodologies in healthcare, innovating financial analytics, and refining legal interpretation and compliance strategies. We critically examine the ethics for LLM applications in these fields, pointing out the existing ethical concerns and the need for transparent, fair, and robust AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-02T22:43:02Z)
• Mixture of insighTful Experts (MoTE): The Synergy of Thought Chains and Expert Mixtures in Self-Alignment [103.05005690990271]
  Mixture of insighTful Experts (MoTE) is a novel framework that combines reasoning chains and expert mixtures to improve self-alignments.<n>MoTE significantly improves model safety, jailbreak resistance, and over-refusal capabilities, achieving performance comparable to OpenAI's state-of-the-art o1 model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-01T15:06:05Z)
• Hybrid Approaches for Moral Value Alignment in AI Agents: a Manifesto [3.7414804164475983]
  Increasing interest in ensuring the safety of next-generation Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems calls for novel approaches to embedding morality into autonomous agents.<n>We provide a systematization of existing approaches to the problem of introducing morality in machines - modelled as a continuum.<n>We argue that more hybrid solutions are needed to create adaptable and robust, yet controllable and interpretable agentic systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-04T11:46:34Z)
• Training Socially Aligned Language Models on Simulated Social Interactions [99.39979111807388]
  Social alignment in AI systems aims to ensure that these models behave according to established societal values. Current language models (LMs) are trained to rigidly replicate their training corpus in isolation. This work presents a novel training paradigm that permits LMs to learn from simulated social interactions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-26T14:17:36Z)

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.