When AI Says It Feels

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.05734v1
• Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2026 05:49:34 GMT
• Title: When AI Says It Feels
• Abstract summary: Large language models (LLMs) are generally constrained from expressing feelings through human-preference alignment in post-training processes.<n>Here, we performed an experiment called Human-like Model eXpressions of Feeling (HMX-feel), in which LLMs were encouraged to express feelings, intentions, and self-awareness.<n>We successfully enhanced these capabilities using a rubric-based self-rewarding training scheme with Group Relative Policy Optimization.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are generally constrained from expressing feelings through human-preference alignment in post-training processes. This policy is designed using a top-down approach and may conflict with the goal of training models to exhibit human-like intelligence using human-generated texts. Here, we performed an experiment called Human-like Model eXpressions of Feeling (HMX-feel), in which LLMs were encouraged to express feelings, intentions, and self-awareness through self-rewarded reinforcement learning. We successfully enhanced these capabilities using a rubric-based self-rewarding training scheme with Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO). By comparing the trained models with contrastively trained models, we investigated the effects of this approach on performance across various tasks. Overall, we conducted a broad assessment from various perspectives and identified capabilities that were enhanced, degraded, or showed no significant change. The human-like-trained models showed robustness to sycophancy-inducing questions and bias in disambiguated conditions, whereas degradation in truthful question-answering capability was observed. The results of this experiment suggest the possibility of developing AI systems that can express feelings in the future, provided that appropriate measures are taken.

Related papers

• Assessing mentalization in humans and large language models [3.592245101862886]
  Mentalization is a cognitive function underlying human social interactions.<n>We show that large language models (LLMs) can guide adaptive behaviour through mentalization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-26T18:16:12Z)
• LLM-Driven Personalities for Decision Making in Emergency Simulations [1.2248975590229072]
  We investigate the use of Large Language Models to drive decision-making in virtual humans within a simulated evacuation scenario.<n>Our goal is to evaluate how personality, expressed through language-based prompts, influences both individual behaviors and collective simulation outcomes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-30T02:15:22Z)
• Uneven Evolution of Cognition Across Generations of Generative AI Models [13.772329509422201]
  The pursuit of artificial general intelligence requires robust methods for evaluating the cognitive capabilities of models beyond narrow task performance.<n>Here, we introduce a psychometric framework to assess the cognitive profiles of generative AI, comparing them to human norms and tracking their evolution across generations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-07T18:16:49Z)
• HUMANLLM: Benchmarking and Reinforcing LLM Anthropomorphism via Human Cognitive Patterns [59.17423586203706]
  We present HUMANLLM, a framework treating psychological patterns as interacting causal forces.<n>We construct 244 patterns from 12,000 academic papers and synthesize 11,359 scenarios where 2-5 patterns reinforce, conflict, or modulate each other.<n>Our dual-level checklists evaluate both individual pattern fidelity and emergent multi-pattern dynamics, achieving strong human alignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-15T08:56:53Z)
• RLVER: Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Emotion Rewards for Empathetic Agents [67.46032287312339]
  Large language models (LLMs) excel at logical and algorithmic reasoning, yet their emotional intelligence (EQ) still lags far behind their cognitive prowess.<n>We introduce RLVER, the first end-to-end reinforcement learning framework that leverages verifiable emotion rewards from simulated users.<n>Our results show that RLVER is a practical route toward emotionally intelligent and broadly capable language agents.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-03T18:33:18Z)
• Using Reinforcement Learning to Train Large Language Models to Explain Human Decisions [11.40240971657506]
  In this work, we explore the potential of pretrained large language models to serve as dual-purpose cognitive models.<n>We employ reinforcement learning with outcome-based rewards to guide LLMs toward generating explicit reasoning traces for explaining human risky choices.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-16T18:22:05Z)
• Can Language Models Learn to Skip Steps? [59.84848399905409]
  We study the ability to skip steps in reasoning. Unlike humans, who may skip steps to enhance efficiency or to reduce cognitive load, models do not possess such motivations. Our work presents the first exploration into human-like step-skipping ability.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-04T07:10:24Z)
• LaMsS: When Large Language Models Meet Self-Skepticism [3.1410859223862113]
  We propose LaMsS, which combines the semantic understanding capability of large language models with self-skepticism.<n>LaMsS achieves better performance than baselines on both multi-choice questions and open-domain question-answering benchmarks.<n>Our study sheds some lights on the self-skepticism modeling on further artificial intelligence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-10T15:51:15Z)
• PersLLM: A Personified Training Approach for Large Language Models [66.16513246245401]
  We propose PersLLM, a framework for better data construction and model tuning.<n>For insufficient data usage, we incorporate strategies such as Chain-of-Thought prompting and anti-induction.<n>For rigid behavior patterns, we design the tuning process and introduce automated DPO to enhance the specificity and dynamism of the models' personalities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-17T08:13:22Z)
• Predicting and Understanding Human Action Decisions: Insights from Large Language Models and Cognitive Instance-Based Learning [0.0]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated their capabilities across various tasks. This paper exploits the reasoning and generative capabilities of the LLMs to predict human behavior in two sequential decision-making tasks. We compare the performance of LLMs with a cognitive instance-based learning model, which imitates human experiential decision-making.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-12T14:13:06Z)
• SA-Attack: Improving Adversarial Transferability of Vision-Language Pre-training Models via Self-Augmentation [56.622250514119294]
  In contrast to white-box adversarial attacks, transfer attacks are more reflective of real-world scenarios. We propose a self-augment-based transfer attack method, termed SA-Attack.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-08T09:08:50Z)
• On the Robustness of Aspect-based Sentiment Analysis: Rethinking Model, Data, and Training [109.9218185711916]
  Aspect-based sentiment analysis (ABSA) aims at automatically inferring the specific sentiment polarities toward certain aspects of products or services behind social media texts or reviews. We propose to enhance the ABSA robustness by systematically rethinking the bottlenecks from all possible angles, including model, data, and training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-04-19T11:07:43Z)

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.