Rethinking Machine Ethics -- Can LLMs Perform Moral Reasoning through the Lens of Moral Theories?
2308.15399
0
0
🌐
Abstract
Making moral judgments is an essential step toward developing ethical AI systems. Prevalent approaches are mostly implemented in a bottom-up manner, which uses a large set of annotated data to train models based on crowd-sourced opinions about morality. These approaches have been criticized for overgeneralizing the moral stances of a limited group of annotators and lacking explainability. This work proposes a flexible top-down framework to steer (Large) Language Models (LMs) to perform moral reasoning with well-established moral theories from interdisciplinary research. The theory-guided top-down framework can incorporate various moral theories. Our experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed framework on datasets derived from moral theories. Furthermore, we show the alignment between different moral theories and existing morality datasets. Our analysis exhibits the potential and flaws in existing resources (models and datasets) in developing explainable moral judgment-making systems.
Create account to get full access
Overview
- The paper proposes a flexible top-down framework to guide (Large) Language Models (LMs) in performing moral reasoning based on well-established moral theories.
- Existing approaches to moral judgments in AI systems often rely on bottom-up training using crowd-sourced data, which can suffer from overgeneralization and lack of explainability.
- The theory-guided top-down framework can incorporate various moral theories to steer LMs towards more principled moral reasoning.
Plain English Explanation
Making moral judgments is an important step in developing ethical AI systems. Most current approaches use a bottom-up method, where AI models are trained on a large set of data annotated with crowd-sourced opinions about morality. However, these approaches have been criticized for generalizing the moral views of a limited group of people and for being difficult to explain.
This paper suggests a different approach, using a flexible top-down framework. Instead of relying solely on crowd-sourced data, this framework incorporates well-established moral theories from interdisciplinary research to guide the AI's moral reasoning. The advantage of this approach is that it can draw on a broader range of ethical perspectives, potentially leading to more principled and explainable moral judgments.
The paper demonstrates the effectiveness of this theory-guided framework on datasets derived from moral theories. It also shows how different moral theories align with existing morality datasets. This analysis highlights both the potential and the limitations of current resources (models and datasets) for developing AI systems that can make explainable moral judgments.
Technical Explanation
The paper proposes a flexible top-down framework to steer (Large) Language Models (LMs) to perform moral reasoning with well-established moral theories from interdisciplinary research. This is in contrast to prevalent bottom-up approaches that use a large set of annotated data to train models based on crowd-sourced opinions about morality.
The authors argue that the bottom-up approaches can suffer from overgeneralizing the moral stances of a limited group of annotators and lacking explainability. The proposed top-down framework aims to address these issues by incorporating various moral theories to steer the LMs towards more principled moral reasoning.
The paper demonstrates the effectiveness of the theory-guided framework on datasets derived from moral theories. Furthermore, it shows the alignment between different moral theories and existing morality datasets. The analysis exhibits the potential and flaws in existing resources (models and datasets) in developing explainable moral judgment-making systems.
Critical Analysis
The paper presents a promising approach to incorporating moral theories into the development of ethical AI systems. By drawing on a broader range of ethical perspectives, the proposed top-down framework has the potential to produce more nuanced and explainable moral judgments compared to bottom-up approaches.
However, the paper does not address the potential challenges of translating complex moral theories into practical guidelines for AI systems. Ensuring that the implementation of these theories aligns with their original intent and philosophical underpinnings may require significant effort and careful consideration.
Additionally, the paper's analysis of existing resources suggests that current models and datasets may have limitations in fully capturing the richness and complexity of moral reasoning. Further research may be needed to develop more comprehensive and diverse datasets, as well as to explore the integration of emotional and contextual factors into moral decision-making.
Conclusion
This paper offers a novel approach to steering LMs towards more principled moral reasoning by incorporating well-established moral theories. The proposed top-down framework has the potential to address the limitations of prevalent bottom-up approaches, leading to more explainable and ethically-aligned AI systems.
While the paper demonstrates the effectiveness of this framework, it also highlights the need for continued research and development to fully realize the potential of theory-guided moral reasoning in AI. By building on this work and addressing the identified challenges, researchers can make significant strides towards creating AI systems that can navigate the nuances of moral decision-making in a more robust and transparent manner.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
MoralBench: Moral Evaluation of LLMs
Jianchao Ji, Yutong Chen, Mingyu Jin, Wujiang Xu, Wenyue Hua, Yongfeng Zhang
0
0
In the rapidly evolving field of artificial intelligence, large language models (LLMs) have emerged as powerful tools for a myriad of applications, from natural language processing to decision-making support systems. However, as these models become increasingly integrated into societal frameworks, the imperative to ensure they operate within ethical and moral boundaries has never been more critical. This paper introduces a novel benchmark designed to measure and compare the moral reasoning capabilities of LLMs. We present the first comprehensive dataset specifically curated to probe the moral dimensions of LLM outputs, addressing a wide range of ethical dilemmas and scenarios reflective of real-world complexities. The main contribution of this work lies in the development of benchmark datasets and metrics for assessing the moral identity of LLMs, which accounts for nuance, contextual sensitivity, and alignment with human ethical standards. Our methodology involves a multi-faceted approach, combining quantitative analysis with qualitative insights from ethics scholars to ensure a thorough evaluation of model performance. By applying our benchmark across several leading LLMs, we uncover significant variations in moral reasoning capabilities of different models. These findings highlight the importance of considering moral reasoning in the development and evaluation of LLMs, as well as the need for ongoing research to address the biases and limitations uncovered in our study. We publicly release the benchmark at https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/folders/1k93YZJserYc2CkqP8d4B3M3sgd3kA8W7 and also open-source the code of the project at https://github.com/agiresearch/MoralBench.
6/10/2024
Ethical Reasoning and Moral Value Alignment of LLMs Depend on the Language we Prompt them in
Utkarsh Agarwal, Kumar Tanmay, Aditi Khandelwal, Monojit Choudhury
0
0
Ethical reasoning is a crucial skill for Large Language Models (LLMs). However, moral values are not universal, but rather influenced by language and culture. This paper explores how three prominent LLMs -- GPT-4, ChatGPT, and Llama2-70B-Chat -- perform ethical reasoning in different languages and if their moral judgement depend on the language in which they are prompted. We extend the study of ethical reasoning of LLMs by Rao et al. (2023) to a multilingual setup following their framework of probing LLMs with ethical dilemmas and policies from three branches of normative ethics: deontology, virtue, and consequentialism. We experiment with six languages: English, Spanish, Russian, Chinese, Hindi, and Swahili. We find that GPT-4 is the most consistent and unbiased ethical reasoner across languages, while ChatGPT and Llama2-70B-Chat show significant moral value bias when we move to languages other than English. Interestingly, the nature of this bias significantly vary across languages for all LLMs, including GPT-4.
4/30/2024
Exploring and steering the moral compass of Large Language Models
Alejandro Tlaie
0
0
Large Language Models (LLMs) have become central to advancing automation and decision-making across various sectors, raising significant ethical questions. This study proposes a comprehensive comparative analysis of the most advanced LLMs to assess their moral profiles. We subjected several state-of-the-art models to a selection of ethical dilemmas and found that all the proprietary ones are mostly utilitarian and all of the open-weights ones align mostly with values-based ethics. Furthermore, when using the Moral Foundations Questionnaire, all models we probed - except for Llama 2-7B - displayed a strong liberal bias. Lastly, in order to causally intervene in one of the studied models, we propose a novel similarity-specific activation steering technique. Using this method, we were able to reliably steer the model's moral compass to different ethical schools. All of these results showcase that there is an ethical dimension in already deployed LLMs, an aspect that is generally overlooked.
6/7/2024
↗️
Learning Machine Morality through Experience and Interaction
Elizaveta Tennant, Stephen Hailes, Mirco Musolesi
0
0
Increasing interest in ensuring safety of next-generation Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems calls for novel approaches to embedding morality into autonomous agents. Traditionally, this has been done by imposing explicit top-down rules or hard constraints on systems, for example by filtering system outputs through pre-defined ethical rules. Recently, instead, entirely bottom-up methods for learning implicit preferences from human behavior have become increasingly popular, such as those for training and fine-tuning Large Language Models. In this paper, we provide a systematization of existing approaches to the problem of introducing morality in machines - modeled as a continuum, and argue that the majority of popular techniques lie at the extremes - either being fully hard-coded, or entirely learned, where no explicit statement of any moral principle is required. Given the relative strengths and weaknesses of each type of methodology, we argue that more hybrid solutions are needed to create adaptable and robust, yet more controllable and interpretable agents. In particular, we present three case studies of recent works which use learning from experience (i.e., Reinforcement Learning) to explicitly provide moral principles to learning agents - either as intrinsic rewards, moral logical constraints or textual principles for language models. For example, using intrinsic rewards in Social Dilemma games, we demonstrate how it is possible to represent classical moral frameworks for agents. We also present an overview of the existing work in this area in order to provide empirical evidence for the potential of this hybrid approach. We then discuss strategies for evaluating the effectiveness of moral learning agents. Finally, we present open research questions and implications for the future of AI safety and ethics which are emerging from this framework.
4/22/2024