❌

Normal view

  • βœ‡cs.AI, q-bio.NC updates on arXiv.org
  • Why Does RLAIF Work At All? Robin Young
    arXiv:2603.03000v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Reinforcement Learning from AI Feedback (RLAIF) enables language models to improve by training on their own preference judgments, yet no theoretical account explains why this self-improvement seemingly works for value learning. We propose the latent value hypothesis, that pretraining on internet-scale data encodes human values as directions in representation space, and constitutional prompts elicit these latent values into preference judgments.
     

Why Does RLAIF Work At All?

arXiv:2603.03000v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Reinforcement Learning from AI Feedback (RLAIF) enables language models to improve by training on their own preference judgments, yet no theoretical account explains why this self-improvement seemingly works for value learning. We propose the latent value hypothesis, that pretraining on internet-scale data encodes human values as directions in representation space, and constitutional prompts elicit these latent values into preference judgments. We formalize this intuition under a linear model where the constitution acts as a projection operator selecting value-relevant directions. Our analysis yields several results. RLAIF improves alignment when the constitution-activated direction correlates with true values better than the model's default generation direction thus explaining the generation-judgment gap; the ceiling on RLAIF quality is determined by how well representations encode values, which scales with model capacity; and adversarial constitutions exist that can activate anti-social value directions encoded from harmful pretraining data. Our account unifies scattered empirical findings including the refusal direction, low-rank safety subspaces, and RLAIF scaling behavior.
  • βœ‡cs.AI, q-bio.NC updates on arXiv.org
  • What Is the Alignment Tax? Robin Young
    arXiv:2603.00047v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: The alignment tax is widely discussed but has not been formally characterized. We provide a geometric theory of the alignment tax in representation space. Under linear representation assumptions, we define the alignment tax rate as the squared projection of the safety direction onto the capability subspace and derive the Pareto frontier governing safety-capability tradeoffs, parameterized by a single quantity of the principal angle betwe
     

What Is the Alignment Tax?

arXiv:2603.00047v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: The alignment tax is widely discussed but has not been formally characterized. We provide a geometric theory of the alignment tax in representation space. Under linear representation assumptions, we define the alignment tax rate as the squared projection of the safety direction onto the capability subspace and derive the Pareto frontier governing safety-capability tradeoffs, parameterized by a single quantity of the principal angle between the safety and capability subspaces. We prove this frontier is tight and show it has a recursive structure. safety-safety tradeoffs under capability constraints are governed by the same equation, with the angle replaced by the partial correlation between safety objectives given capability directions. We derive a scaling law decomposing the alignment tax into an irreducible component determined by data structure and a packing residual that vanishes as $O(m'/d)$ with model dimension $d$, and establish conditions under which capability preservation mediates or resolves conflicts between safety objectives.
❌