Skip to content
AI News HubLIVE
Original source2 min read

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

Summary

arXiv:2609.26929v1 Announce Type: new 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…

SourcearXiv AIAuthor: David Tsoi, Esra D\"onmez
Which Objectives Need a Dial? Predicting Objective Conflict and Covering Trade-offs in Steerable Pluralistic Alignment
Report an error

The correction channel is not available yet. You can copy the article reference below for later.

Correction instructions
Read article

[Submitted on 22 Sep 2026]

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

View a PDF of the paper titled Which Objectives Need a Dial? Predicting Objective Conflict and Covering Trade-offs in Steerable Pluralistic Alignment, by David Tsoi and Esra D\"onmez

View PDF HTML (experimental)

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.

Comments: Preprint

Subjects:

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

Cite as: arXiv:2609.26929 [cs.AI]

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

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.26929

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Esra Dönmez [view email] [v1] Tue, 22 Sep 2026 18:22:52 UTC (6,074 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled Which Objectives Need a Dial? Predicting Objective Conflict and Covering Trade-offs in Steerable Pluralistic Alignment, by David Tsoi and Esra D\"onmez

View PDF

HTML (experimental)

TeX Source

view license

Current browse context:

cs.AI

new | recent | 2026-09

Change to browse by:

cs cs.CL cs.CY

References & Citations

NASA ADS

Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

Loading...

Data provided by:

Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)

Connected Papers Toggle

Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)

Litmaps Toggle

Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)

scite.ai Toggle

scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

Links to Code Toggle

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub Toggle

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

GotitPub Toggle

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Huggingface Toggle

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast Toggle

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle

Replicate (What is Replicate?)

Spaces Toggle

Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)

Spaces Toggle

TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

Core recommender toggle

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

Author

Venue

Institution

Topic

About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

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.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

Key points and analysis

Article intelligence

EngineersAdvanced

Key points

  • AI generation is temporarily unavailable; this entry was preserved with deterministic fallback metadata.
  • arXiv:2609.26929v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: People hold diverse, sometimes conflicting values, so no single aligned model can satisfy everyone. Pluralistic alignment therefore…

Highlights and analysis are generated automatically and may contain errors. Check the original source.