arXiv:2506. 01692v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Human preferences in RLHF are typically modeled as a function of the human's reward function or corresponding optimal state-action values.
arXiv:2606. 09124v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) has enabled progress on reasoning-intensive tasks by relying on task-specific verifiers that provide automated correctness signals.
The paper presents an AI-based method that uses a large language model to emulate human decision-making by assigning it a "type vector" describing traits such as Altruism and Risk Aversion. By varying these dimensions and values, the authors fit the model to over 119,000 decisions from 78,657 participants in 10 classic economic games, finding that three dimensions—Risk Aversion, Strategic Sophistication, and Trust—sufficiently capture human behavior. The resulting type clusters, fewer than a dozen, predict behavior in new games, suggesting a low-dimensional, portable representation of human behavior across diverse settings.
The paper introduces a method for learning heterogeneous, individually conditioned utility functions—termed individuated utility—by leveraging rational choice theory. It presents a multi-stage architecture that estimates these functions from multimodal data and evaluates it on a large dataset of aesthetic judgments about automotive wheel designs. Results show that individuated models outperform universal utility models and foundation baselines, indicating that annotator disagreement reflects meaningful preference diversity.
arXiv:2608. 10126v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) aggregates heterogeneous preferences into a single reward model, assuming preference homogeneity.
arXiv:2606. 30863v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agents typically assume an expert user -- one with well-formed preferences about what they want -- and default to clarifying questions whenever the task is underspecified.
arXiv:2608. 12339v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Language models (LLMs) were found to be susceptible to a host of social, affective, and cognitive biases.
arXiv:2607. 16195v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We identify a structured confound in Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF).
arXiv:2606. 22974v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Recent work on preference elicitation in large language models (LLMs) has demonstrated that, when given a series of choices between two outcomes, LLMs reveal a coherent, model-specific utility structure.
arXiv:2608. 16710v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As autonomous vehicles (AVs) approach Level 4 and Level 5 operational capability [SAE International, 2018], their on- board decision systems must handle not only safety-critical locomotion but also their subsequent moral weight.
arXiv:2607. 11632v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Human choice behavior, including route choice, exhibits systematic behavioral biases that deviate from the assumptions of full rationality.
The paper critiques the standard fixed-rule approach for deriving labels from human feedback in human-robot collaboration, showing that human-provided implication labels often differ and improve reward learning. It introduces IMPLIED, a method that starts with fixed-rule implications but learns to infer and revise accepted/rejected action labels over time, outperforming both the fixed rule and LLM baselines on recorded trajectories and a physical pizza‑making study. As a result, IMPLIED reduces preference‑estimation error and yields robot actions that better align with combined reward objectives.
arXiv:2606. 17657v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: People make decisions differently in strategic interactions.