REVIEW 2 cited by
Probing the Preferences of a Language Model: Integrating Verbal and Behavioral Tests of AI Welfare
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Probing the Preferences of a Language Model: Integrating Verbal and Behavioral Tests of AI Welfare
read the original abstract
We develop new experimental paradigms for measuring welfare in language models. We compare verbal reports of models about their preferences with preferences expressed through behavior when navigating a virtual environment and selecting conversation topics. We also test how costs and rewards affect behavior and whether responses to an eudaimonic welfare scale - measuring states such as autonomy and purpose in life - are stable across semantically equivalent prompts. Overall, we observed a notable degree of mutual support between our measures. The reliable correlations observed between stated preferences and behavior across conditions suggest that preference satisfaction can, in principle, serve as an empirically measurable welfare proxy in some of today's AI systems. Furthermore, our design offered an illuminating setting for qualitative observation of model behavior. Yet, the consistency between measures was more pronounced in some models and conditions than others and responses were changed by perturbations. Due to this, and the background uncertainty about the nature of welfare and the cognitive states (and welfare subjecthood) of language models, we are currently uncertain whether our methods successfully measure the welfare state of language models. Nevertheless, these findings highlight the feasibility of welfare measurement in language models, inviting further exploration.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
A Scalable Approach to Evaluating Moral Sensitivity in LLMs
Under morally irrelevant noise, eight LLMs preserve the semantic content of identified moral features above calibrated floors, despite significant changes in feature counts.
-
No Reliable Evidence of Self-Reported Sentience in Small Large Language Models
Open-weights LLMs from 0.6B to 70B parameters consistently deny being sentient, and activation-based truth classifiers provide no clear evidence that these denials are untruthful.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.