arXiv preprint ·
Do LLMs Have Values? A Quantitative Analysis and Alignment Framework for Values in Large Language Models
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
As Large Language Models (LLMs) increasingly handle complex subjective tasks, aligning their intentions and behaviors with human values has become a critical scientific challenge. However, current efforts are confounded by a striking behavioral paradox: they fluctuate unpredictably under minor wording changes ("swing"), yet stubbornly ignore explicit instructions to correct ingrained biases ("rigidity"). Resolving this duality is critical for reliable AI alignment. To systematically understand and safely steer these latent subjective preferences, our study is structured around three fundamental questions. First, do LLMs possess an intrinsic value system? By projecting responses from 106 LLMs (150,000 queries per model) and 95,000 human survey profiles into a shared sociological space, we empirically confirm that they do. However, they do not mirror human diversity, instead crystallizing into a highly concentrated, idealized value core. Second, how can these values be quantified? We propose the Prior-Environment-Cognition (PEC) framework. This model mathematically defines value expression as the joint outcome of inherent dispositions like parameter weights (Prior), external contexts such as user prompts (Environment), and internal reasoning processes like Chain-of-Thought (Cognition). Finally, how can LLMs' values be aligned toward a desired target? Using PEC diagnostics, we establish an adaptive "Alignment Prescription". Rather than blindly applying resource-intensive training, this method identifies the minimum effective intervention needed for each dimension, ranging from zero-cost prompts to targeted parameter updates. Extensive empirical validation confirms that our approach successfully verifies the presence of LLM values, accurately quantifies their shifts, and achieves more efficient and precise steering than conventional blind training, all without degrading general capabilities.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Artificial Intelligence
Early-Bird Decoding: Accelerating Diffusion LLMs with Learnable Block Sizes and Parallel Sampling
EDCT-Bench: Uncovering Faithfulness Gaps in VLMs via Explanation-Driven Counterfactual Testing
Fine-Tuning Fixes Mode Collapse and Over-Dispersion in LLMs
Measuring AI Leadership: Development and Validation of a Multidimensional Measure for AI-Native Organizations
OPD-Aha: From Linguistic Momentum to Visual Reflection in Multimodal On-Policy Distillation
Get the few papers worth your time in Artificial Intelligence every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.