Editorial Alignment: A Participatory Approach to Engaging Editorial Expertise in LLM-mediated Knowledge Dissemination

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.20258v1
• Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2026 14:07:47 GMT
• Title: Editorial Alignment: A Participatory Approach to Engaging Editorial Expertise in LLM-mediated Knowledge Dissemination
• Abstract summary: editorial authority is challenged by pretrained LLMs that arrive already aligned with the values and dissemination strategies of their commercial developers.<n>This paper investigates editor participation in re-aligning LLM interfaces to editorial standards through design workshops.
• Score: 1.794933530351619
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The emergence of LLM-driven information services is reshaping the conditions under which public knowledge institutions operate, threatening to absorb the editorial function these institutions exist to exercise. While LLMs offer powerful new affordances for knowledge dissemination, editorial authority is challenged by pretrained LLMs that arrive already aligned with the values and dissemination strategies of their commercial developers. This paper investigates editor participation in re-aligning LLM interfaces to editorial standards through design workshops, in a case study where we design and implement an LLM-enabled encyclopedia interface with a Nordic public knowledge institution. We introduce editorial alignment as a design practice within Participatory AI, framing AI alignment as a design process and positioning the editorial standard as a design artefact that translates editorial practice and values into alignment objectives for technical implementation. Last, we discuss how editorial alignment can create space for ongoing participation and give editors agency in LLM-mediated knowledge dissemination.

Related papers

• EtCon: Edit-then-Consolidate for Reliable Knowledge Editing [85.20993502078899]
  We propose Edit-then-Consolidate, a novel knowledge editing paradigm that aims to bridge the gap between theoretical knowledge editing methods and their real-world applicability.<n>Our framework consistently improves editing reliability and generalization under real-world evaluations, while better preserving locality and pre-trained capabilities.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-04T12:43:50Z)
• Getting In Contract with Large Language Models -- An Agency Theory Perspective On Large Language Model Alignment [0.0]
  Large language models (LLMs) in organizations potentially revolutionize our lives and work.<n>They can generate off-topic, discriminating, or harmful content.<n>This AI alignment problem often stems from misspecifications during the LLM adoption.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-09T12:10:14Z)
• WINELL: Wikipedia Never-Ending Updating with LLM Agents [72.14647217009066]
  WiNELL is an agentic framework for continuously updating Wikipedia articles.<n>Our approach employs a multi-agent framework to aggregate online information, select new and important knowledge for a target entity in Wikipedia, and then generate precise edit suggestions for human review.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-30T07:51:42Z)
• Societal Alignment Frameworks Can Improve LLM Alignment [50.97852062232431]
  We argue that improving LLM alignment requires incorporating insights from societal alignment frameworks.<n>We then investigate how uncertainty within societal alignment frameworks manifests in LLM alignment.<n>We end our discussion by offering an alternative view on LLM alignment, framing the underspecified nature of its objectives as an opportunity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-27T13:26:07Z)
• "Ownership, Not Just Happy Talk": Co-Designing a Participatory Large Language Model for Journalism [7.25169954977234]
  Journalism has emerged as an essential domain for understanding the uses, limitations, and impacts of large language models (LLMs) in the workplace.<n>How might a journalist-led LLM work, and what can participatory design illuminate about the present-day challenges about adapting one-size-fits-all'' foundation models to a given context of use?<n>Our 20 interviews with reporters, data journalists, editors, labor organizers, product leads, and executives highlight macro, meso, and micro tensions that designing for this opportunity space must address.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-28T21:06:52Z)
• LLM-Collaboration on Automatic Science Journalism for the General Audience [3.591143309194537]
  Science journalism reports current scientific discoveries to non-specialists. This task can be challenging as the audience often lacks specific knowledge about the presented research. We propose a framework that integrates three LLMs mimicking the real-world writing-reading-feedback-revision workflow.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-13T03:31:35Z)
• Editing Conceptual Knowledge for Large Language Models [65.38231526537476]
  This paper pioneers the investigation of editing conceptual knowledge for Large Language Models (LLMs) We construct a novel benchmark dataset ConceptEdit and establish a suite of new metrics for evaluation. experimental results reveal that, although existing editing methods can efficiently modify concept-level definition to some extent, they also have the potential to distort the related instantial knowledge.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-10T16:57:10Z)
• Learning to Edit: Aligning LLMs with Knowledge Editing [101.96620267293731]
  We propose a Learning to Edit (LTE) framework, focusing on teaching large language models to apply updated knowledge into input questions. LTE features a two-phase process: (i) the Alignment Phase, which fine-tunes LLMs on a meticulously curated parallel dataset to make reliable, in-scope edits. We demonstrate LTE's superiority in knowledge editing performance, robustness in both batch and sequential editing, minimal interference on general tasks, and rapid editing speeds.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-19T07:45:17Z)
• A Comprehensive Study of Knowledge Editing for Large Language Models [82.65729336401027]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown extraordinary capabilities in understanding and generating text that closely mirrors human communication. This paper defines the knowledge editing problem and provides a comprehensive review of cutting-edge approaches. We introduce a new benchmark, KnowEdit, for a comprehensive empirical evaluation of representative knowledge editing approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-02T16:54:58Z)
• DocTER: Evaluating Document-based Knowledge Editing [53.14000724633775]
  We explore knowledge editing using easily accessible documents instead of manually labeled factual triples.<n>A comprehensive four-perspective evaluation is introduced: Edit Success, Locality, Reasoning, and Cross-lingual Transfer.<n>Experiments on popular knowledge editing methods demonstrate that editing with documents presents significantly greater challenges than using triples.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-19T09:17:19Z)

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.