'AI Alignment' Encompasses Competing Technical Priorities

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.14315v1
• Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2026 09:56:01 GMT
• Title: 'AI Alignment' Encompasses Competing Technical Priorities
• Abstract summary: The literature contains many distinct concepts falling under the heading of 'AI alignment'<n>We claim that realistic interventions may promote 'AI alignment' under one conception while being actively counterproductive from the perspective of others.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The ML literature contains many distinct concepts falling under the heading of 'AI alignment'. After noting three concepts of AI alignment in the context of their corresponding research programs, we claim that realistic interventions may promote 'AI alignment' under one conception while being actively counterproductive from the perspective of others. We suggest that tensions between alignment ideals emerge due to differences in background threat-models, alongside differences in normative orientations. In light of our analysis, researchers aiming to further the goal of 'AI alignment' should do five things. First, they should not conflate distinctions of policy and distinctions of scientific scope; second, methodological disagreements should be acknowledged explicitly; third, researchers should distinguish between 'AI alignment' as a high-level ideal and specific 'alignment proxies' used in empirical research; fourth, they should use more granular concepts to identify both the source and nature of possible AI harms/benefits; fifth, they should explicitly acknowledge the diversity of 'alignment' concepts in both empirical work and in communication with non-technical audiences.

Related papers

• Empirical AI Ethics: Reconfiguring Ethics towards a Situated, Plural, and Transformative Approach [0.0]
  Critics argue that AI ethics frequently serves corporate interests through practices of 'ethics washing'<n>This paper adopts a Science and Technology Studies perspective to critically interrogate the field of AI ethics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-22T12:58:15Z)
• Rigor in AI: Doing Rigorous AI Work Requires a Broader, Responsible AI-Informed Conception of Rigor [83.99510317617694]
  We argue that a broader conception of what rigorous AI research and practice should entail is needed.<n>We aim to provide useful language and a framework for much-needed dialogue about the AI community's work.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-17T15:44:41Z)
• The Value of Disagreement in AI Design, Evaluation, and Alignment [0.0]
  Disagreements are widespread across the design, evaluation, and alignment pipelines of AI systems.<n>Standard practices in AI development often obscure or eliminate disagreement, resulting in an engineered homogenization.<n>We develop a normative framework to guide practical reasoning about disagreement in the AI lifecycle.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-12T17:22:30Z)
• Beyond Preferences in AI Alignment [15.878773061188516]
  We characterize and challenge the preferentist approach to AI alignment. We show how preferences fail to capture the thick semantic content of human values. We argue that AI systems should be aligned with normative standards appropriate to their social roles.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-30T03:14:20Z)
• Position: Towards Bidirectional Human-AI Alignment [109.57781720848669]
  We argue that the research community should explicitly define and critically reflect on "alignment" to account for the bidirectional and dynamic relationship between humans and AI.<n>We introduce the Bidirectional Human-AI Alignment framework, which not only incorporates traditional efforts to align AI with human values but also introduces the critical, underexplored dimension of aligning humans with AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-13T16:03:25Z)
• AI Alignment: A Comprehensive Survey [69.61425542486275]
  AI alignment aims to make AI systems behave in line with human intentions and values.<n>We identify four principles as the key objectives of AI alignment: Robustness, Interpretability, Controllability, and Ethicality.<n>We decompose current alignment research into two key components: forward alignment and backward alignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-30T15:52:15Z)
• Factoring the Matrix of Domination: A Critical Review and Reimagination of Intersectionality in AI Fairness [55.037030060643126]
  Intersectionality is a critical framework that allows us to examine how social inequalities persist. We argue that adopting intersectionality as an analytical framework is pivotal to effectively operationalizing fairness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-16T21:02:09Z)
• Fairness in Agreement With European Values: An Interdisciplinary Perspective on AI Regulation [61.77881142275982]
  This interdisciplinary position paper considers various concerns surrounding fairness and discrimination in AI, and discusses how AI regulations address them. We first look at AI and fairness through the lenses of law, (AI) industry, sociotechnology, and (moral) philosophy, and present various perspectives. We identify and propose the roles AI Regulation should take to make the endeavor of the AI Act a success in terms of AI fairness concerns.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-08T12:32:08Z)
• 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)
• Artificial Intelligence, Values and Alignment [2.28438857884398]
  normative and technical aspects of the AI alignment problem are interrelated. It is important to be clear about the goal of alignment. The central challenge for theorists is not to identify 'true' moral principles for AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-01-13T10:32:16Z)

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.