AI Pluralism and the Worlds It Misses

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.16167v1
• Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2026 03:30:48 GMT
• Title: AI Pluralism and the Worlds It Misses
• Abstract summary: The paper develops a bounded conceptual and qualitative synthesis across value pluralism, pluralistic alignment, participatory and democratic AI, justice, science and technology studies, accountability research, and three urban AI companion cases.<n>PLG is not presented as a validated scoring instrument; it is a framework for making the evidence and governance conditions of pluralistic AI explicit.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: AI pluralism is often framed as a problem of representing diverse values, preferences, users, or outputs. This paper argues that this framing is incomplete because AI systems also impose ontologies: they define what counts as an entity, relation, feature, harm, benefit, and valid form of evidence. We define ontological flattening as the conversion of situated, contested, and historically specific meanings into a restricted technical category, proxy, aggregation rule, or benchmark target that is treated as neutral and difficult to contest. The paper develops a bounded conceptual and qualitative synthesis across value pluralism, pluralistic alignment, participatory and democratic AI, procedural justice, science and technology studies, accountability research, aggregate themes from 11 expert interviews, and three urban AI companion cases. The cases illustrate how pluralistic methods can improve or structure model behavior while still compressing categories, proxies, aggregation rules, and revision rights before affected actors have procedural standing. We introduce Pluralistic Lifecycle Governance (PLG) as a preliminary qualitative audit scaffold for documenting ontological openness, epistemic inclusion, procedural authority, evaluation pluralism, and lifecycle accountability. PLG is not presented as a validated scoring instrument; it is a framework for making the evidence and governance conditions of pluralistic AI explicit.

Related papers

• Does Syntax Matter? A Graph-Augmented Variational Topic Model for Computational Social Sciences [51.56484100374058]
  This paper introduces the Structural Contextual Probabilistic Topic Model ( SCPTM), an architecture that incorporates syntactic dependency relations into topic inference.<n>We evaluate seven topic modeling techniques across four corpora differing in register and discourse structure.<n>Results show that SCPTM's neural architecture yields substantial gains in document-topic alignment over generative baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-07T17:39:06Z)
• A Roadmap to Impactful Pluralistic Alignment Research [43.31026042225045]
  Pluralistic value alignment has emerged as an active research agenda.<n>Yet, there's no public evidence that it has shaped the training or evaluation of the AI systems people actually use.<n>This goes against the primary motivations and goals of pluralistic alignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-24T13:46:03Z)
• When AI Classifies: What Counts as Public Administration? [0.0]
  This study examines how alternative systems of scholarly representation identify and characterize broad public administration (PA) and artificial intelligence related public administration (AI-in-PA) scholarship.<n>Using Web of Science and OpenAlex, it compares five approaches based on author-defined, citation-driven, and AI-assisted representations.<n>The results highlight substantial differences in corpus size, publication types, publishing outlets, temporal development, and thematic clustering and structure.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-26T20:44:17Z)
• From Sycophantic Consensus to Pluralistic Repair: Why AI Alignment Must Surface Disagreement [8.459329029609602]
  We argue that aggregation alone is an incomplete primitive for deployed pluralistic alignment.<n>We formalise a metric, the Pluralistic Repair Score (PRS), distinguishing principled revision from capitulation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-14T14:47:06Z)
• Measuring the Machine: Evaluating Generative AI as Pluralist Sociotechical Systems [0.0]
  The thesis argues that generative AI must be evaluated as a pluralist sociotechnical system.<n>MaSH Loops is a framework for tracing how models, users, and institutions co-construct meaning and values.<n>The World Values Benchmark introduces a distributional approach grounded in World Values Survey data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-22T13:29:33Z)
• Infrastructuring Contestability: A Framework for Community-Defined AI Value Pluralism [0.0]
  The proliferation of AI-driven systems presents a challenge to Human-Computer Interaction and Computer-Supported Cooperative Work.<n>Current approaches to value alignment, which rely on centralized, top-down definitions, lack the mechanisms for meaningful contestability.<n>This paper introduces Community-Defined AI Value Pluralism, a socio-technical framework that addresses this gap.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-07T16:45:50Z)
• 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)
• Authoritarian Recursions: How Fiction, History, and AI Reinforce Control in Education, Warfare, and Discourse [0.0]
  Article theorizes how AI systems consolidate institutional control across education, warfare, and digital discourse.<n>Case studies are analyzed alongside cultural imaginaries such as Orwell's textitNineteen Eighty-Four, Skynet, and textitBlack Mirror, used as tools to surface ethical blind spots.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-12T01:01:26Z)
• A Roadmap to Pluralistic Alignment [49.29107308098236]
  We propose a roadmap to pluralistic alignment, specifically using language models as a test bed. We identify and formalize three possible ways to define and operationalize pluralism in AI systems. We argue that current alignment techniques may be fundamentally limited for pluralistic AI.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-07T18:21:17Z)
• A Unifying Framework for Learning Argumentation Semantics [47.84663434179473]
  We present a novel framework, which uses an Inductive Logic Programming approach to learn the acceptability semantics for several abstract and structured argumentation frameworks in an interpretable way.<n>Our framework outperforms existing argumentation solvers, thus opening up new future research directions in the area of formal argumentation and human-machine dialogues.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-18T20:18:05Z)
• 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)
• 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)
• GERE: Generative Evidence Retrieval for Fact Verification [57.78768817972026]
  We propose GERE, the first system that retrieves evidences in a generative fashion. The experimental results on the FEVER dataset show that GERE achieves significant improvements over the state-of-the-art baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-04-12T03:49:35Z)

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.