Which Objectives Need a Dial? Predicting Objective Conflict and Covering Trade-offs in Steerable Pluralistic Alignment

Title:Which Objectives Need a Dial? Predicting Objective Conflict and Covering Trade-offs in Steerable Pluralistic Alignment

Abstract:People hold diverse, sometimes conflicting values, so no single aligned model can satisfy everyone. Pluralistic alignment therefore calls for steerable models that can balance competing objectives differently. Multi-Objective Direct Preference Optimization (MODPO) does this by using an objective weight to span a continuum of trade-offs. We study two questions: when can one model improve two objectives simultaneously, and how can many trade-offs be covered without training a separate model for each? Across seven objective pairs from HelpSteer and UltraFeedback, two pre-training measurements predict whether objectives align or conflict for human-annotated data, but not for AI-annotated data, where response length and repetition confound reward-model scores. For broader trade-off coverage, selecting the nearest trained model and merging model parameters both help, but neither consistently matches direct training. These findings yield practical guidance for building steerable models that serve diverse preferences.

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL); Computers and Society (cs.CY)

arXiv:2609.26929 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2609.26929v1 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.26929 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.