Rethinking How AI Embeds and Adapts to Human Values: Challenges and Opportunities

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.17104v1
• Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2025 18:19:05 GMT
• Title: Rethinking How AI Embeds and Adapts to Human Values: Challenges and Opportunities
• Authors: Sz-Ting Tzeng, Frank Dignum,
• Abstract summary: We argue that AI systems should implement long-term reasoning and remain adaptable to evolving values.<n>Value alignment requires more theories to address the full spectrum of human values.<n>We identify the challenges associated with value alignment and indicate directions for advancing value alignment research.
• Score: 0.6113558800822273
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The concepts of ``human-centered AI'' and ``value-based decision'' have gained significant attention in both research and industry. However, many critical aspects remain underexplored and require further investigation. In particular, there is a need to understand how systems incorporate human values, how humans can identify these values within systems, and how to minimize the risks of harm or unintended consequences. In this paper, we highlight the need to rethink how we frame value alignment and assert that value alignment should move beyond static and singular conceptions of values. We argue that AI systems should implement long-term reasoning and remain adaptable to evolving values. Furthermore, value alignment requires more theories to address the full spectrum of human values. Since values often vary among individuals or groups, multi-agent systems provide the right framework for navigating pluralism, conflict, and inter-agent reasoning about values. We identify the challenges associated with value alignment and indicate directions for advancing value alignment research. In addition, we broadly discuss diverse perspectives of value alignment, from design methodologies to practical applications.

Related papers

• Learning the Value Systems of Agents with Preference-based and Inverse Reinforcement Learning [1.6970482663318245]
  Agreement Technologies refer to open computer systems in which autonomous software agents interact with one another.<n>We propose a novel method to automatically emphlearn value systems from observations and human demonstrations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-04T13:07:15Z)
• Understanding the Process of Human-AI Value Alignment [1.6799377888527687]
  Value alignment in computer science research is often used to refer to the process of aligning artificial intelligence with humans, but the way the phrase is used often lacks precision.<n>We conduct a systematic literature review to advance the understanding of value alignment in artificial intelligence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-17T09:39:38Z)
• ValueCompass: A Framework for Measuring Contextual Value Alignment Between Human and LLMs [14.621675648356236]
  We introduce Value, a framework of fundamental values, grounded in psychological theory and a systematic review.<n>We apply Value to measure the value alignment of humans and large language models (LLMs) across four real-world scenarios.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-15T02:13:03Z)
• Towards Bidirectional Human-AI Alignment: A Systematic Review for Clarifications, Framework, and Future Directions [101.67121669727354]
  Recent advancements in AI have highlighted the importance of guiding AI systems towards the intended goals, ethical principles, and values of individuals and groups, a concept broadly recognized as alignment. The lack of clarified definitions and scopes of human-AI alignment poses a significant obstacle, hampering collaborative efforts across research domains to achieve this alignment. We introduce a systematic review of over 400 papers published between 2019 and January 2024, spanning multiple domains such as Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), Natural Language Processing (NLP), Machine Learning (ML)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-13T16:03:25Z)
• 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)
• Concept Alignment as a Prerequisite for Value Alignment [11.236150405125754]
  Value alignment is essential for building AI systems that can safely and reliably interact with people. We show how concept alignment can lead to systematic value mis-alignment. We describe an approach that helps minimize such failure modes by jointly reasoning about a person's concepts and values.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-30T22:23:15Z)
• 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)
• Towards a multi-stakeholder value-based assessment framework for algorithmic systems [76.79703106646967]
  We develop a value-based assessment framework that visualizes closeness and tensions between values. We give guidelines on how to operationalize them, while opening up the evaluation and deliberation process to a wide range of stakeholders.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-09T19:28:32Z)
• Metaethical Perspectives on 'Benchmarking' AI Ethics [81.65697003067841]
  Benchmarks are seen as the cornerstone for measuring technical progress in Artificial Intelligence (AI) research. An increasingly prominent research area in AI is ethics, which currently has no set of benchmarks nor commonly accepted way for measuring the 'ethicality' of an AI system. We argue that it makes more sense to talk about 'values' rather than 'ethics' when considering the possible actions of present and future AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-11T14:36:39Z)

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.