The paper "Value-Preserving Architectures for Agentic AI Systems" discusses how architectural choices in large language model-based multi‑agent systems (MAS) can promote human‑centered values such as privacy, fairness, and safety. It introduces three value‑preserving architectural patterns: a privacy‑aware federated topology, a distributed architecture that encourages pluralism and diversity, and a guard‑agent design to detect and mitigate unfairness. Representative use cases illustrate how these patterns can be applied in real‑world scenarios, aiming to provide guidelines for building trustworthy MAS.
By Alessandro Pesare, Tommaso Dolci, Katja Hose, Emanuel Sallinger
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: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:2601. 21700v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) increasingly support culturally sensitive decision making, yet often exhibit misalignment due to skewed pretraining data and the absence of structured value representations.
By Wonduk Seo, Wonseok Choi, Junseo Koh, Juhyeon Lee, Hyunjin An, Minhyeong Yu, Jian Park, Qingshan Zhou, Seunghyun Lee, Yi Bu
arXiv:2607. 16903v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Value-aware AI systems require explicit computational representations of human values (groundings) and their aggregation into value systems in order to align their decisions with ours.
By Andr\'es Holgado-S\'anchez, Holger Billhardt, Sascha Ossowski
ExpertIVS is a framework that uses 14 sociological expert agents to interpret World Values Survey responses, reconstructing individual value systems in a coherent, internally consistent manner rather than simply concatenating survey answers. It introduces a multi‑agent debate mechanism to assess LLM alignment with these value profiles during dynamic interactions. Experiments on 480 individuals from 12 countries show a 90.78% value restoration fidelity and a 5.3% improvement in value generalization over baseline methods, while also demonstrating strong personality discriminability and behavioral consistency.
By Zhen Wang, Yuqi Ren, Yuehan Cui, Hongxiang Wang, Jianxiang Peng, Zhaoxia Zhang, Bingkun Zhu, Tongxuan Zhang, Dezhi Tong, Deyi Xiong
arXiv:2601.12538v2 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: Reasoning is a fundamental cognitive process underlying inference, problem-solving, and decision-making. While large language models (LLMs) d...
By Tianxin Wei, Ting-Wei Li, Zhining Liu, Xuying Ning, Ze Yang, Jiaru Zou, Zhichen Zeng, Ruizhong Qiu, Xiao Lin, Dongqi Fu, Zihao Li, Mengting Ai, Duo Zhou, Wenxuan Bao, Yunzhe Li, Gaotang Li, Cheng Qian, Yu Wang, Xiangru Tang, Yin Xiao, Liri Fang, Hui Liu, Xianfeng Tang, Yuji Zhang, Chi Wang, Jiaxuan You, Heng Ji, Hanghang Tong, Jingrui He
The article surveys LLM-based agentic reasoning frameworks, presenting a unified formal language that categorizes them into single-agent, tool-based, and multi-agent methods. It reviews application scenarios in scientific discovery, healthcare, software engineering, society, economics, and general-purpose tasks, and compares the distinct features and evaluation strategies of each category. The survey highlights the rapid development of complex agentic systems in real-world contexts.
By Bingxi Zhao, Lin Geng Foo, Ping Hu, Christian Theobalt, Hossein Rahmani, Jun Liu
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
The paper examines how users delegate tasks to the AI agent OpenClaw by analyzing 73,093 Reddit posts. It identifies 21 human values grouped into six categories—such as Autonomous Operation, Dependable Operation, Affordable Operation, Bounded Reach, Reviewability, and Equitable Access—and finds that values are largely satisfied when users describe the agent’s outputs but often unmet when users discuss supervising the agent. The authors term this pattern "value‑sensitive delegation," emphasizing that supporting human values requires attention to both what an agent does and the conditions users set around its use.
By Renkai Ma, Ruyuan Wan, Xuan Lu, Fan Yang, Chen Chen, Lingyao Li
arXiv:2509. 00559v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Humans intuitively navigate social interactions by simulating unspoken dynamics and reasoning about others' perspectives, even with limited information.
By Xuhui Zhou, Jiarui Liu, Akhila Yerukola, Hyunwoo Kim, Maarten Sap
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