arXiv:2607. 14240v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Current alignment approaches typically focus on emulating human behavior using static representations of human preferences, failing to capture the dynamic, context-dependent nature of real-world human-AI interactions.
By Valerie Chen, Cleotilde Gonzalez, Anita Williams Woolley, Michael Lee, Tongshuang Wu, Vincent Conitzer, Aarti Singh
arXiv:2604. 14990v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: The prospect of Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) is increasingly driving institutional decisions, and alignment of AGI is a hard problem.
By Till Mossakowski, Helena Esther Grass
arXiv:2608. 10327v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Can AI systems be aligned to human values?
By Andrew Smart, Shazeda Ahmed, Jackie Kay, Jimmy Tobin, Kris Shrishak, Abeba Birhane
arXiv:2605. 01642v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Prevailing alignment methods target a fixed set of preferences and therefore risk forcing value lock-in as societal norms evolve over time.
By Rachel Freedman
arXiv:2606. 13755v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We argue that aligning AI to aggregated human preferences is the wrong target.
By Nikita Kazeev, Bui Nhat Huyen Phan
arXiv:2607. 07021v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Humans continuously coordinate with others in dynamic interactions, often through implicit, hard-to-quantify social norms that act as shared tacit expectations among interacting agents.
By Yi Yang, Siyuan Liu, Xin Gao, Huamu Sun, Chao Liu, Qing Zhou, Bingbing Nie
arXiv:2608. 03910v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As AI systems are deployed across increasingly diverse social contexts, alignment can no longer be framed as the optimization of a single, unified set of values.
By Matt Ratto, Abhishek Moturu, Daniel Silver
arXiv:2608. 12372v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: AI systems are increasingly employed as decision aids, decision delegates, or autonomous decision-makers.
By Vijay Keswani, Breanna K. Nguyen, Cyrus Cousins, Vincent Conitzer, Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Jana Schaich Borg
arXiv:2605. 28210v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Drawing on Ullmann-Margalit's concept of opting (transformative, irrevocable, and shadowed by foreclosed alternatives), we show that current AI systems raise a profound ethical problem that existing AI ethics has not fully captured: the illusion of opting, in which persons and groups encounter the deceptive appearance of meaningful consequential choice while the agency needed to become genuinely capable of choosing is weakened.
By Eugene Yu Ji
arXiv:2608. 08240v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: This paper explores the idea of promoting well-being and safety in human-AI interactions by forcing AI agents explicitly to empower humans and to manage the power balance between humans and AI agents in a desirable way.
By Jobst Heitzig, Ram Potham
arXiv:2607. 28881v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As more responsibility is placed upon AI systems, it becomes increasingly important to guarantee that these systems are aligned with humanity.
By Winter Cross
arXiv:2608. 03958v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As autonomous agents powered by foundation models are increasingly integrated into social and economic systems, understanding the principles governing their collective behavior is essential for ensuring safety and cooperation.
By Alexander Meulemans, Maciej Wo{\l}czyk, Marissa A. Weis, Rajai Nasser, Roberta Rocca, Seijin Kobayashi, Guillaume Lajoie, Angelika Steger, Blake Richards, Marcus Hutter, James Manyika, Rif A. Saurous, Jo\~ao Sacramento, Blaise Ag\"uera y Arcas