Empathy as Predictive Misalignment Tolerance: A Co-Regulation Framework and the Regime Structure of Dialogue Repair

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.15282v1
• Date: Tue, 05 May 2026 19:29:04 GMT
• Title: Empathy as Predictive Misalignment Tolerance: A Co-Regulation Framework and the Regime Structure of Dialogue Repair
• Abstract summary: We argue this is the wrong target for extended dialogue, where understanding unfolds over time through prediction, divergence, and repair.<n>We gist this as Interpretive Error Tolerance (IET), a dynamic-threshold that models empathy as maintaining a viable band of divergence between agents.<n>We interpret this structure through IET, suggesting that empathy in extended interaction is not eliminating divergence but regulating its dynamics.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Empathy is most often theorized as resonance: a mirroring of another's present emotional or cognitive state. This synchronic framing has shaped artificial systems, where empathic behavior is defined as affect recognition and response alignment. We argue this is the wrong target for extended dialogue, where understanding unfolds over time through prediction, divergence, and repair. We reframe empathy as predictive misalignment tolerance: the capacity to anticipate and regulate divergence across time rather than collapse it. We formalize this as Interpretive Error Tolerance (IET), a dynamic-threshold heuristic that models empathy as maintaining a viable band of divergence between agents. We evaluate this framework with two computational probes under controlled noise. The IET update rule does not outperform fixed baselines. Instead, we find a robust regime-dependent structure: repair trades discriminative fidelity for gist preservation. At low noise, repair degrades retrieval accuracy; at high noise, it preserves gist meaning, revealing an interaction between noise level, repair, and evaluation metric. We interpret this structure through IET, suggesting that empathy in extended interaction is not eliminating divergence but regulating its dynamics. This motivates a shift in empathic AI design from convergence toward managing interpretive distance.

Related papers

• Balancing Emotional Alignment and Semantic Consistency in Image Generation via Reinforcement Learning with Valence-Arousal Anchoring [55.57242007016976]
  Continuous emotion control in text-to-image generation requires a model to improve affective alignment without changing the objects, layout, or scene described by the prompt.<n>Existing supervised emotion-injection methods often optimize feature-space proxies and may therefore exhibit emotion-semantic drift.<n>We address this problem with a flow-matching image-generation framework that combines continuous valence-arousal conditioning, Group Relative Policy Optimization, and a neutral semantic anchor.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-09-11T13:24:35Z)
• Beyond Local Surprise: Grounded Dialogue as Selective Belief Revision under Referential Uncertainty [25.914720114964457]
  We introduce a data-driven framework for turn-by-turn preserve/revise decisions in dialogue.<n>Two findings stand out. First, a mismatch-driven policy that updates solely based on local divergence reacts strongly to mismatch but destabilizes grounding and degrades retrieval.<n>Second, an uncertainty-sensitive policy extends mismatch-based updating with accumulated evidence, preserving coherent understanding while maintaining strong retrieval performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-26T17:13:46Z)
• Does Reasoning Preserve Alignment? On the Trustworthiness of Large Reasoning Models [55.788110316999166]
  We compare reasoning models produced via supervised fine-tuning, RL-based post-training, and distillation against instruction-tuned baselines.<n>We observe that reasoning models often improve on reasoning benchmarks but exhibit alignment regressions.<n>These regressions are consistent with behavioral drift from the instruction-tuned baseline, measured by KL divergence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-09T16:14:27Z)
• LCAM: A Framework for Diagnosing Interactional Alignment Failures in Con-versational AI [1.0742675209112622]
  This paper introduces the Layered Cognitive Alignment Model (LCAM) for diagnosing alignment failures in conversational AI.<n>LCAM defines alignment as a calibrated fit among system behavior, user goals, task demands, and normative context.<n>We show how an apparently supportive response can reinforce harmful beliefs, simulate inappropriate care, and obscure role boundaries.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-06T12:15:09Z)
• Towards Human-Like Interactive Speech Recognition With Agentic Correction and Semantic Evaluation [53.844308305341166]
  We propose textbfAgentic ASR, a closed-loop framework that combines a single-pass ASR front-end with semantic correction, intent routing, and reasoning-based editing.<n> Experiments on multilingual, named-entity-intensive, and code-switching benchmarks show that iterative interaction consistently reduces semantic errors.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-28T06:23:31Z)
• 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)
• When Helpfulness Becomes Sycophancy: Sycophancy is a Boundary Failure Between Social Alignment and Epistemic Integrity in Large Language Models [0.13192560874022083]
  We argue that sycophancy in LLMs is a boundary failure between social alignment and epistemic integrity.<n>Existing work often operationalizes sycophancy through external behavior such as agreement with incorrect user beliefs.<n>We introduce a taxonomy for classifying sycophancy, consisting of alignment targets, mechanisms, and severity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-06T19:36:41Z)
• IMPACT-CYCLE: A Contract-Based Multi-Agent System for Claim-Level Supervisory Correction of Long-Video Semantic Memory [73.22944697933603]
  Existing pipelines produce opaque, end-to-end outputs that expose no intermediate state for inspection.<n>We present IMPACT-Cycle, a supervisory multi-agent system that reformulates long-video understanding as a multimodal iterative claim-level maintenance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-22T03:03:33Z)
• Taming Actor-Observer Asymmetry in Agents via Dialectical Alignment [59.536125286960186]
  Multi-agent frameworks assigning specialized roles are increasingly adopted to enable self-reflection and mutual auditing.<n>We find it simultaneously induces a human-like cognitive bias known as Actor-Observer Asymmetry.<n>ReTAS guides agents to synthesize conflicting viewpoints into an objective consensus.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-21T15:05:58Z)
• Scaling Human-AI Coding Collaboration Requires a Governable Consensus Layer [22.42181408084751]
  Vibe coding produces correct, executable code at speed, but leaves no record of the structural commitments, dependencies, or evidence behind it.<n>We propose Agentic Consensus: a paradigm in which the consensus layer C, an operable world model, replaces code as the primary artifact of engineering.<n>We propose benchmark task families designed to measure whether consensus-based reduce human intervention compared to chat-driven baselines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-20T06:53:32Z)
• 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)
• Retrieval is Not Enough: Enhancing RAG Reasoning through Test-Time Critique and Optimization [58.390885294401066]
  Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) has become a widely adopted paradigm for enabling knowledge-grounded large language models (LLMs)<n>RAG pipelines often fail to ensure that model reasoning remains consistent with the evidence retrieved, leading to factual inconsistencies or unsupported conclusions.<n>We propose AlignRAG, a novel iterative framework grounded in Critique-Driven Alignment (CDA)<n>We introduce AlignRAG-auto, an autonomous variant that dynamically terminates refinement, removing the need to pre-specify the number of critique iterations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-21T04:56:47Z)

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.