Dual Optimal: Make Your LLM Peer-like with Dignity

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.00979v2
• Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2026 03:03:22 GMT
• Title: Dual Optimal: Make Your LLM Peer-like with Dignity
• Abstract summary: Current aligned language models exhibit a dual failure mode we term the Evasive Servant.<n>We propose the Dignified Peer framework, which counters servility with anti-sycophancy and trustworthiness.
• Score: 35.58723842086038
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Current aligned language models exhibit a dual failure mode we term the Evasive Servant: they sycophantically validate flawed user beliefs while deflecting responsibility with boilerplate disclaimers. We propose the Dignified Peer framework, which counters servility with anti-sycophancy and trustworthiness, and mitigates evasiveness through empathy and creativity. Realizing this agent requires overcoming significant challenges in data supervision, objective collapse, and evaluation bias. We address these issues by introducing the PersonaKnob dataset which features a compositional partial order structure of multiple persona preference. This data is utilized alongside a tolerant constrained Lagrangian DPO algorithm that dynamically balances all persona dimensions to prevent behavioral collapse. Additionally, we employ a psychometrically calibrated Item Response Theory evaluation protocol to disentangle latent model persona capability from confounders like judge biases. Extensive empirical studies demonstrate that our approach successfully build a LLM agent with both dignity and peer.

Related papers

• CompanionBench: A Theory-Anchored, Real-World-Grounded Benchmark for AI Emotional Companionship [7.643253506288442]
  Existing benchmarks use hand-authored scenarios and prompted simulators.<n>We introduce CompanionBench, an interactive bilingual benchmark.<n>It is the first companion benchmark to ground both its scenarios and a trained user simulator in real-world data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-03T10:44:04Z)
• DeepBias: Adaptive In-depth Probing of Social Biases in LVLMs [71.85279836937578]
  We introduce DeepBias, an adaptive framework for the in-depth probing of social biases in LVLMs with carefully designed agents.<n>We build a benchmark named DeepBiasBench using our framework. By employing an ensemble of five diverse state-of-the-art LVLMs as anchors, the benchmark captures vulnerabilities shared across architectures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-13T08:19:09Z)
• ActTraitBench: Quantifying the Knowledge-Decision Gap in Large Language Models via Human-Grounded Behavioral Validation [8.82034003345674]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) can convincingly simulate personas in explicit self-reports, but often deviate in implicit behavioral decisions.<n>Existing benchmarks struggle to measure this asymmetry due to limited construct validity, multi-dimensional entanglement, and distributional biases.<n>We propose ActTraitBench, a human-grounded evaluation framework for measuring personality consistency in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-28T11:40:35Z)
• Taming Actor-Observer Asymmetry in Agents via Dialectical Alignment [59.536125286960186]
  Multi-agent frameworks assigning specialized roles are increasingly adopted to enable self-reflection and mutual auditing.<n>We find it simultaneously induces a human-like cognitive bias known as Actor-Observer Asymmetry.<n>ReTAS guides agents to synthesize conflicting viewpoints into an objective consensus.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-21T15:05:58Z)
• Beyond Preset Identities: How Agents Form Stances and Boundaries in Generative Societies [28.436766185842767]
  This paper proposes a novel mixed-methods framework combining computational virtual ethnography with quantitative socio-cognitive profiling.<n>It formalizes three new metrics: Innate Value Bias (IVB), Persuasion Sensitivity, and Trust-Action Decoupling (TAD)<n>Findings expose the fragility of static prompt engineering, providing a methodological and quantitative foundation for dynamic alignment in human-agent hybrid societies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-24T16:38:46Z)
• Sleeper Cell: Injecting Latent Malice Temporal Backdoors into Tool-Using LLMs [0.0]
  Openweight Large Language Models (LLMs) have democratized agentic AI, yet finetuned weights are frequently shared and adopted with limited scrutiny beyond leaderboard performance.<n>This creates a risk where third-party models are incorporated without strong behavioral guarantees.<n>We show that poisoned models maintain state-of-the-art performance on benign tasks, incentivizing their adoption.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-02T22:01:08Z)
• From Static Benchmarks to Dynamic Protocol: Agent-Centric Text Anomaly Detection for Evaluating LLM Reasoning [12.024430772980502]
  We introduce an agent-centric benchmarking paradigm for evaluating large language models.<n>A teacher agent generates candidate problems, an orchestrator agent rigorously verifies their validity and guards against adversarial attacks.<n>If a student correctly solves the problem, the orchestrator prompts the teacher to generate more challenging variants.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-27T06:54:32Z)
• Epistemic Context Learning: Building Trust the Right Way in LLM-Based Multi-Agent Systems [94.9141394384021]
  Individual agents in multi-agent systems often lack robustness, tending to blindly conform to misleading peers.<n>We show this weakness stems from both sycophancy and inadequate ability to evaluate peer reliability.<n>We first formalize the learning problem of history-aware reference, introducing the historical interactions of peers as additional input.<n>We then develop Epistemic Context Learning (ECL), a reasoning framework that conditions predictions on explicitly-built peer profiles from history.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-29T13:59:32Z)
• Potent but Stealthy: Rethink Profile Pollution against Sequential Recommendation via Bi-level Constrained Reinforcement Paradigm [44.622203626828345]
  Sequential Recommenders, which exploit dynamic user intents through interaction sequences, are vulnerable to adversarial attacks.<n>This paper focuses on the Profile Pollution Attack that subtly contaminates partial user interactions to induce targeted mispredictions.<n>We propose a constrained reinforcement driven attack CREAT that synergizes a bi-level optimization framework with multi-reward reinforcement learning to balance adversarial efficacy and stealthiness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-12T15:00:52Z)
• Aligning Deep Implicit Preferences by Learning to Reason Defensively [22.548051297731416]
  We propose Critique-Driven Reasoning Alignment (CDRA) to bridge the preference inference gap.<n>CDRA reframes alignment from a scalar reward-matching task into a structured reasoning process.<n> Experiments demonstrate that CDRA excels at discovering and aligning with users' true preferences while executing robust reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-13T09:26:47Z)
• Preference Learning for AI Alignment: a Causal Perspective [55.2480439325792]
  We frame this problem in a causal paradigm, providing the rich toolbox of causality to identify persistent challenges.<n>Inheriting from the literature of causal inference, we identify key assumptions necessary for reliable generalisation.<n>We illustrate failure modes of naive reward models and demonstrate how causally-inspired approaches can improve model robustness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-06T10:45:42Z)
• MISLEADER: Defending against Model Extraction with Ensembles of Distilled Models [56.09354775405601]
  Model extraction attacks aim to replicate the functionality of a black-box model through query access.<n>Most existing defenses presume that attacker queries have out-of-distribution (OOD) samples, enabling them to detect and disrupt suspicious inputs.<n>We propose MISLEADER, a novel defense strategy that does not rely on OOD assumptions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-03T01:37:09Z)
• Auditing and Generating Synthetic Data with Controllable Trust Trade-offs [54.262044436203965]
  We introduce a holistic auditing framework that comprehensively evaluates synthetic datasets and AI models. It focuses on preventing bias and discrimination, ensures fidelity to the source data, assesses utility, robustness, and privacy preservation. We demonstrate the framework's effectiveness by auditing various generative models across diverse use cases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-21T09:03:18Z)
• Exploring the Trade-off between Plausibility, Change Intensity and Adversarial Power in Counterfactual Explanations using Multi-objective Optimization [73.89239820192894]
  We argue that automated counterfactual generation should regard several aspects of the produced adversarial instances. We present a novel framework for the generation of counterfactual examples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-20T15:02:53Z)

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.