Pluralistic-Alignment Urbanism: Operationalizing a Right to AI for Inclusive Public Space

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.12434v1
• Date: Fri, 15 May 2026 23:59:37 GMT
• Title: Pluralistic-Alignment Urbanism: Operationalizing a Right to AI for Inclusive Public Space
• Abstract summary: This paper proposes a procedural governance framework that treats public-space AI systems as civic infrastructure.<n>The paper examines how disagreement, subgroup variation, bounded predictive scaling, and neutral preference judgments can inform municipal AI governance.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Municipal agencies increasingly use machine learning to inventory sidewalks, score streetscapes, and generate visualizations of public-space interventions. These systems produce outputs that enter budgeting, design iteration, and public justification, yet judgments about inclusion, safety, and belonging remain contested. This paper proposes Pluralistic-Alignment Urbanism (PAU), a procedural governance framework that treats public-space AI systems as civic infrastructure and formulates a procedural Right to AI for municipal uses of such systems. Drawing on two participatory case studies with community organizations in Montreal, Canada, the paper examines how disagreement, subgroup variation, bounded predictive scaling, and neutral preference judgments can inform municipal AI governance. Street Review elicits resident criteria for streetscape evaluation and trains a subgroup-aware scaling model for co-produced judgments, achieving an R2 of 0.89 on a held-out test set. LIVS, a Local Intersectional Visual Spaces dataset, constructs pluralistic preference data for aligning text-to-image models and treats neutral selections as evidence of indeterminacy. Across the cases, disagreement appears structured, deliberation changes what counts as evidence, scaling is feasible but limited by modality and coverage, and neutrality constrains what preference tuning can justify. PAU translates these constraints into a municipal governance architecture with disaggregated reporting, a versioned value register, standing deliberative cells, procurement clauses, and defined pause and rollback authority.

Related papers

• Inferring Urban Mobility Interactions from Aggregated Dynamics [45.73534370352232]
  Real-time urban governance depends not only on knowing where people are, but on how they move between places.<n>Here we show that this directional structure need not be observed to be known.<n>We infer future OD flows from area-level counts alone across twelve mobility datasets from cities in the United States and China.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-07T11:13:51Z)
• The urban right to AI: Pluralistic co-design and governance of public space [0.0]
  This thesis asks what follows when scores, maps, and generated images become part of municipal decision-making.<n>Because public space is contested, this algorithmic layer cannot be governed through technical performance alone.<n>The thesis develops a civic Right to AI and a pluralistic approach to alignment in which differences in public values are made visible.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-25T02:43:20Z)
• The Geography of Algorithmic Judgment: LLM Intermediaries, Place Identity, and Racial Steering in Housing Search [0.0]
  Large language models (LLMs) are rapidly assuming an intermediary role in housing search.<n>We conduct a behavioral audit of seven open-weight and closed-source LLMs across four U.S. cities.<n>We find that steering is an emergent behavior of the model's interpretive license rather than primarily a static property.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-04T20:17:58Z)
• Towards an automated AI-based framework for floor plan compliance checks for residential buildings [39.146761527401424]
  This article explores current advancements in automated floor plan analysis, particularly AI-driven approaches.<n>A conceptual framework is proposed for automated compliance checking in multi-apartment buildings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-26T02:29:24Z)
• Position: General Alignment Has Hit a Ceiling; Edge Alignment Must Be Taken Seriously [51.03213216886717]
  We take the position that the dominant paradigm of General Alignment reaches a structural ceiling in settings with conflicting values.<n>We introduce Edge Alignment as a distinct approach in which systems preserve multi dimensional value structure.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-23T16:51:43Z)
• Institutional AI: Governing LLM Collusion in Multi-Agent Cournot Markets via Public Governance Graphs [1.3763052684269788]
  This paper advances an experimental framework for evaluating Institutional AI.<n>Central to this approach is the governance graph, a public, immutable manifest that declares legal states, transitions, sanctions, and restorative paths.<n>We compare three regimes: Ungoverned (baseline incentives from the structure of the Cournot market), Constitutional (a prompt-only policy-as-prompt prohibition implemented as a fixed written anti-collusion constitution) and Institutional.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-16T15:26:56Z)
• Are LLMs Vulnerable to Preference-Undermining Attacks (PUA)? A Factorial Analysis Methodology for Diagnosing the Trade-off between Preference Alignment and Real-World Validity [45.92643973404507]
  We investigate whether aligned models are vulnerable to Preference-Undermining Attacks (PUA), a class of manipulative prompting strategies.<n>Surprisingly, more advanced models are sometimes more susceptible to manipulative prompts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-10T15:16:23Z)
• LLM-as-a-Judge: Rapid Evaluation of Legal Document Recommendation for Retrieval-Augmented Generation [40.06592175227558]
  This paper investigates a principled approach to evaluating Retrieval-Augmented Generation systems in legal contexts.<n>We find that traditional agreement metrics like Krippendorff's alpha can be misleading in the skewed distributions typical of AI system evaluations.<n>Our findings suggest a path toward scalable, cost-effective evaluation that maintains the precision demanded by legal applications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-15T19:20:21Z)
• Urban AI Governance Must Embed Legal Reasonableness for Democratic and Sustainable Cities [0.0]
  This paper introduces the Urban Reasonableness Layer (URL), a conceptual framework that adapts the legal "reasonable person" standard for supervisory oversight in municipal AI systems.<n>We argue that embedding the legal "reasonable person" standard in municipal AI systems is essential for democratic and sustainable urban governance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-16T22:39:04Z)
• Whose Truth? Pluralistic Geo-Alignment for (Agentic) AI [42.108524228070756]
  What is considered appropriate, truthful, or legal can differ widely across regions due to cultural norms, political realities, and legislation.<n>This paper reviews key geographic research problems, suggests topics for future work, and outlines methods for assessing alignment sensitivity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-07T14:21:33Z)
• Negotiative Alignment: Embracing Disagreement to Achieve Fairer Outcomes -- Insights from Urban Studies [1.3787753513429983]
  Disagreement patterns were systematic in our sample.<n>Group discussion reduced information gaps but not value conflicts.<n>Treating disagreement as signal and reporting worst-group outcomes alongside totals may help planners and AI practitioners surface trade-offs and preserve minority priorities while maintaining efficiency.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-16T18:55:54Z)
• FairLENS: Assessing Fairness in Law Enforcement Speech Recognition [37.75768315119143]
  We propose a novel and adaptable evaluation method to examine the fairness disparity between different models. We conducted fairness assessments on 1 open-source and 11 commercially available state-of-the-art ASR models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-21T19:23:40Z)

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.