Paper by Vincent Conitzer, et al: “Foundation models such as GPT-4 are fine-tuned to avoid unsafe or otherwise problematic behavior, so that, for example, they refuse to comply with requests for help with committing crimes or with producing racist text. One approach to fine-tuning, called reinforcement learning from human feedback, learns from humans’ expressed preferences over multiple outputs. Another approach is constitutional AI, in which the input from humans is a list of high-level principles. But how do we deal with potentially diverging input from humans? How can we aggregate the input into consistent data about ”collective” preferences or otherwise use it to make collective choices about model behavior? In this paper, we argue that the field of social choice is well positioned to address these questions…(More)”.
How to contribute:
Did you come across – or create – a compelling project/report/book/app at the leading edge of innovation in governance?
Share it with us at info@thelivinglib.org so that we can add it to the Collection!
About the Curator
Get the latest news right in your inbox
Subscribe to curated findings and actionable knowledge from The Living Library, delivered to your inbox every Friday
Related articles
Artificial Intelligence
Big Data
DATA
Technology, Peace, and Human Dignity: Reflections on the Relevance of Magnifica Humanitas for PeaceTech
Posted in May 28, 2026 by Stefaan Verhulst
Behavioral Science
Design Thinking
INSTITUTIONAL INNOVATION
Stop Building Innovation Labs
Posted in May 28, 2026 by Stefaan Verhulst
Citizen Engagement
PEOPLE
Mapping the hot spots and cold spots across our civic life journey: data shows ways to improve access to civic engagement and participation
Posted in May 28, 2026 by Stefaan Verhulst