A Roadmap to Pluralistic Alignment
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
• This paper proposes a roadmap for achieving pluralistic alignment in AI systems, where multiple, potentially conflicting values and perspectives are represented and balanced. • The authors argue that value pluralism, which acknowledges the existence of legitimate but competing ethical frameworks, should be a key consideration in the development of AI systems. • The paper explores several approaches to incorporating pluralism into AI, including modular pluralism, value kaleidoscope, and bidirectional human-AI alignment.
Plain English Explanation
The paper discusses the importance of incorporating multiple, sometimes conflicting, human values and perspectives into the development of AI systems. The authors argue that AI should not be designed to optimize for a single set of values, but rather should acknowledge and balance the diverse range of ethical frameworks that exist in society.
This pluralistic approach to AI alignment is motivated by the observation that there is often no single, universally agreed-upon "right" answer when it comes to ethical and social issues. Different individuals and groups may have legitimate but competing views on what is moral or desirable. By incorporating this diversity of perspectives into AI systems, the authors believe we can create more robust and trustworthy AI that better serves the needs of all members of society.
The paper outlines several strategies for achieving pluralistic alignment, such as modular pluralism, which involves using multiple AI models with different value systems, and value kaleidoscope, which explores ways to engage AI with the full spectrum of human values. The authors also discuss the importance of bidirectional human-AI alignment, where AI systems are designed to not only align with human values, but also to shape and influence those values in a positive way.
Technical Explanation
The paper presents a roadmap for achieving pluralistic alignment in AI systems, where multiple, potentially conflicting values and perspectives are represented and balanced. The authors argue that value pluralism, which acknowledges the existence of legitimate but competing ethical frameworks, should be a key consideration in the development of AI systems.
The paper explores several approaches to incorporating pluralism into AI, including [object Object], which involves using multiple AI models with different value systems, and [object Object], which explores ways to engage AI with the full spectrum of human values. The authors also discuss the importance of [object Object], where AI systems are designed to not only align with human values, but also to shape and influence those values in a positive way.
The paper also reviews existing research on [object Object] and the [object Object], which explores the challenges of achieving true value alignment between humans and AI systems.
Critical Analysis
The paper raises important points about the need to consider value pluralism in the development of AI systems. The authors make a compelling case that optimizing for a single set of values can lead to AI that fails to serve the diverse needs and perspectives of all members of society.
However, the paper does not provide detailed technical solutions or empirical evidence for the proposed approaches. The discussion of modular pluralism, value kaleidoscope, and bidirectional human-AI alignment is largely conceptual, and the paper does not delve into the practical challenges of implementing these strategies.
Furthermore, the paper does not address the potential trade-offs or tensions that may arise when attempting to balance multiple, competing values within an AI system. The authors acknowledge the difficulty of quantifying misalignment and resolving the AI alignment paradox, but more research is needed to understand how these challenges can be overcome in practice.
Overall, the paper serves as a thought-provoking exploration of the importance of pluralism in AI, but further work is needed to translate these ideas into concrete, scalable solutions.
Conclusion
This paper presents a compelling case for the importance of incorporating pluralistic values and perspectives into the development of AI systems. The authors argue that value pluralism, which acknowledges the existence of legitimate but competing ethical frameworks, should be a key consideration in the design of AI.
The paper outlines several approaches to achieving pluralistic alignment, including modular pluralism, value kaleidoscope, and bidirectional human-AI alignment. These strategies aim to balance the diverse range of human values and perspectives within AI systems, rather than optimizing for a single set of values.
While the paper is largely conceptual and lacks detailed technical solutions, it serves as an important contribution to the ongoing discussion around the ethical and social implications of AI. By highlighting the need for pluralism in AI, the authors challenge the field to move beyond simplistic notions of value alignment and to embrace the complex, multifaceted nature of human ethics and decision-making.
As AI systems become increasingly integrated into our lives, it is crucial that they are designed to serve the needs of all members of society, not just a privileged few. The roadmap outlined in this paper offers a promising path forward, one that prioritizes the inclusion of diverse perspectives and the balancing of competing values. Further research and practical implementation of these ideas will be essential for ensuring that AI development is guided by a pluralistic vision of the common good.
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
0
A Roadmap to Pluralistic Alignment
Taylor Sorensen, Jared Moore, Jillian Fisher, Mitchell Gordon, Niloofar Mireshghallah, Christopher Michael Rytting, Andre Ye, Liwei Jiang, Ximing Lu, Nouha Dziri, Tim Althoff, Yejin Choi
With increased power and prevalence of AI systems, it is ever more critical that AI systems are designed to serve all, i.e., people with diverse values and perspectives. However, aligning models to serve pluralistic human values remains an open research question. In this piece, we propose a roadmap to pluralistic alignment, specifically using language models as a test bed. We identify and formalize three possible ways to define and operationalize pluralism in AI systems: 1) Overton pluralistic models that present a spectrum of reasonable responses; 2) Steerably pluralistic models that can steer to reflect certain perspectives; and 3) Distributionally pluralistic models that are well-calibrated to a given population in distribution. We also formalize and discuss three possible classes of pluralistic benchmarks: 1) Multi-objective benchmarks, 2) Trade-off steerable benchmarks, which incentivize models to steer to arbitrary trade-offs, and 3) Jury-pluralistic benchmarks which explicitly model diverse human ratings. We use this framework to argue that current alignment techniques may be fundamentally limited for pluralistic AI; indeed, we highlight empirical evidence, both from our own experiments and from other work, that standard alignment procedures might reduce distributional pluralism in models, motivating the need for further research on pluralistic alignment.
Read more8/22/2024
🤖
0
Value Kaleidoscope: Engaging AI with Pluralistic Human Values, Rights, and Duties
Taylor Sorensen, Liwei Jiang, Jena Hwang, Sydney Levine, Valentina Pyatkin, Peter West, Nouha Dziri, Ximing Lu, Kavel Rao, Chandra Bhagavatula, Maarten Sap, John Tasioulas, Yejin Choi
Human values are crucial to human decision-making. Value pluralism is the view that multiple correct values may be held in tension with one another (e.g., when considering lying to a friend to protect their feelings, how does one balance honesty with friendship?). As statistical learners, AI systems fit to averages by default, washing out these potentially irreducible value conflicts. To improve AI systems to better reflect value pluralism, the first-order challenge is to explore the extent to which AI systems can model pluralistic human values, rights, and duties as well as their interaction. We introduce ValuePrism, a large-scale dataset of 218k values, rights, and duties connected to 31k human-written situations. ValuePrism's contextualized values are generated by GPT-4 and deemed high-quality by human annotators 91% of the time. We conduct a large-scale study with annotators across diverse social and demographic backgrounds to try to understand whose values are represented. With ValuePrism, we build Kaleido, an open, light-weight, and structured language-based multi-task model that generates, explains, and assesses the relevance and valence (i.e., support or oppose) of human values, rights, and duties within a specific context. Humans prefer the sets of values output by our system over the teacher GPT-4, finding them more accurate and with broader coverage. In addition, we demonstrate that Kaleido can help explain variability in human decision-making by outputting contrasting values. Finally, we show that Kaleido's representations transfer to other philosophical frameworks and datasets, confirming the benefit of an explicit, modular, and interpretable approach to value pluralism. We hope that our work will serve as a step to making more explicit the implicit values behind human decision-making and to steering AI systems to make decisions that are more in accordance with them.
Read more4/3/2024
0
Modular Pluralism: Pluralistic Alignment via Multi-LLM Collaboration
Shangbin Feng, Taylor Sorensen, Yuhan Liu, Jillian Fisher, Chan Young Park, Yejin Choi, Yulia Tsvetkov
While existing alignment paradigms have been integral in developing large language models (LLMs), LLMs often learn an averaged human preference and struggle to model diverse preferences across cultures, demographics, and communities. We propose Modular Pluralism, a modular framework based on multi-LLM collaboration for pluralistic alignment: it plugs into a base LLM a pool of smaller but specialized community LMs, where models collaborate in distinct modes to flexibility support three modes of pluralism: Overton, steerable, and distributional. Modular Pluralism is uniquely compatible with black-box LLMs and offers the modular control of adding new community LMs for previously underrepresented communities. We evaluate Modular Pluralism with six tasks and four datasets featuring questions/instructions with value-laden and perspective-informed responses. Extensive experiments demonstrate that Modular Pluralism advances the three pluralism objectives across six black-box and open-source LLMs. Further analysis reveals that LLMs are generally faithful to the inputs from smaller community LLMs, allowing seamless patching by adding a new community LM to better cover previously underrepresented communities.
Read more6/26/2024
0
Towards Bidirectional Human-AI Alignment: A Systematic Review for Clarifications, Framework, and Future Directions
Hua Shen, Tiffany Knearem, Reshmi Ghosh, Kenan Alkiek, Kundan Krishna, Yachuan Liu, Ziqiao Ma, Savvas Petridis, Yi-Hao Peng, Li Qiwei, Sushrita Rakshit, Chenglei Si, Yutong Xie, Jeffrey P. Bigham, Frank Bentley, Joyce Chai, Zachary Lipton, Qiaozhu Mei, Rada Mihalcea, Michael Terry, Diyi Yang, Meredith Ringel Morris, Paul Resnick, David Jurgens
Recent advancements in general-purpose AI have highlighted the importance of guiding AI systems towards the intended goals, ethical principles, and values of individuals and groups, a concept broadly recognized as alignment. However, the lack of clarified definitions and scopes of human-AI alignment poses a significant obstacle, hampering collaborative efforts across research domains to achieve this alignment. In particular, ML- and philosophy-oriented alignment research often views AI alignment as a static, unidirectional process (i.e., aiming to ensure that AI systems' objectives match humans) rather than an ongoing, mutual alignment problem. This perspective largely neglects the long-term interaction and dynamic changes of alignment. To understand these gaps, we introduce a systematic review of over 400 papers published between 2019 and January 2024, spanning multiple domains such as Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), Natural Language Processing (NLP), Machine Learning (ML). We characterize, define and scope human-AI alignment. From this, we present a conceptual framework of Bidirectional Human-AI Alignment to organize the literature from a human-centered perspective. This framework encompasses both 1) conventional studies of aligning AI to humans that ensures AI produces the intended outcomes determined by humans, and 2) a proposed concept of aligning humans to AI, which aims to help individuals and society adjust to AI advancements both cognitively and behaviorally. Additionally, we articulate the key findings derived from literature analysis, including literature gaps and trends, human values, and interaction techniques. To pave the way for future studies, we envision three key challenges and give recommendations for future research.
Read more8/13/2024