Internal Pluralism and the Limits of Pairwise Comparisons
arXiv:2607.02672v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Local pairwise comparisons are a standard tool for learning how people want decision rules to work, e.g., in participatory design or alignment. However, their use builds in two strong assumptions: that local comparisons are sufficient evidence about how a person wants an automated decision rule to behave, and that people can always answer those comparisons decisively. We investigate how these assumptions may be compromised under internal
Record details
Published: 20 July 2026
Source: arXiv cs.CY
Category: Research
Topics: Safety & alignment · Finance, VC & PE
Retrieved: 20 July 2026
Related evidence
These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.
Internal Pluralism and the Limits of Pairwise Comparisons
arXiv · 2 July 2026
An Iterative Geometric Approach to Optimizing Separating Hyperplanes
arXiv cs.LG · 19 July 2026
For What Reason? Interpreting Models' Encoding of Causation and Antithesis
arXiv · 20 July 2026
Norm or Direction? Decoding Vision Mambas for High-Resolution Vision
arXiv · 21 July 2026
Geometric Configurations of Perturbed Jailbreak Prompts
arXiv red teaming query · 22 July 2026
Amplifying the storm: Climate disinformation dynamics during natural disasters on right-wing extremist Telegram channels
HKS Misinformation Review · 23 July 2026
How to cite this record
ethics.ai (20 July 2026), “Internal Pluralism and the Limits of Pairwise Comparisons,” evidence record 11742, https://ethics.ai/record/11742 (originally published by arXiv cs.CY).
Use and limitations
This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.