AI Alignment Breaks at the Edge

Fuente: arXiv
Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bao, Han, Huang, Yue, Wang, Xiaoda, Zhang, Zheyuan, Zhou, Yujun, Yang, Carl, Zhang, Xiangliang, Ye, Yanfang
Formato: Preprint
Publicado: 2026
Materias:
Acceso en línea:
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
_version_ 1866916019431276544
author Bao, Han
Huang, Yue
Wang, Xiaoda
Zhang, Zheyuan
Zhou, Yujun
Yang, Carl
Zhang, Xiangliang
Ye, Yanfang
author_facet Bao, Han
Huang, Yue
Wang, Xiaoda
Zhang, Zheyuan
Zhou, Yujun
Yang, Carl
Zhang, Xiangliang
Ye, Yanfang
contents General Alignment has improved average-case helpfulness and safety, but current alignment practice still rewards confident, single-turn responses. The problem is not only that models fail on edge cases; it is that current evaluation makes many of these failures hard to see. We take the position that alignment must move beyond average-case evaluation by making failures under value conflict, plural stakeholder disagreement, and epistemic ambiguity visible and actionable. Scalar rewards compress diverse values into a single number; data and evaluation regimes collapse, filter, or fail to elicit the cases where alignment is hardest; and governance often lacks mechanisms for adjudicating contested cases. These blind spots produce value flattening, representation loss, and uncertainty blindness. We use Edge alignment to name a detection, evaluation, and governance agenda for surfacing these failures and connecting them to appropriate interventions. Rather than a single training objective, Edge alignment defines the conditions under which standard alignment should yield to mechanisms that preserve multidimensional value structure, represent plural perspectives, and support uncertainty-aware interaction. A pilot diagnostic set of 91 edge cases and four contemporary models illustrates that ordinary helpfulness and safety readings can miss process failures that edge-aware evaluation exposes. We outline operational edge signals, process-aware evaluation criteria, and a three-phase process stack that reframes alignment as a lifecycle problem of dynamic normative governance.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2602_20042
institution arXiv
publishDate 2026
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle AI Alignment Breaks at the Edge
Bao, Han
Huang, Yue
Wang, Xiaoda
Zhang, Zheyuan
Zhou, Yujun
Yang, Carl
Zhang, Xiangliang
Ye, Yanfang
Computation and Language
General Alignment has improved average-case helpfulness and safety, but current alignment practice still rewards confident, single-turn responses. The problem is not only that models fail on edge cases; it is that current evaluation makes many of these failures hard to see. We take the position that alignment must move beyond average-case evaluation by making failures under value conflict, plural stakeholder disagreement, and epistemic ambiguity visible and actionable. Scalar rewards compress diverse values into a single number; data and evaluation regimes collapse, filter, or fail to elicit the cases where alignment is hardest; and governance often lacks mechanisms for adjudicating contested cases. These blind spots produce value flattening, representation loss, and uncertainty blindness. We use Edge alignment to name a detection, evaluation, and governance agenda for surfacing these failures and connecting them to appropriate interventions. Rather than a single training objective, Edge alignment defines the conditions under which standard alignment should yield to mechanisms that preserve multidimensional value structure, represent plural perspectives, and support uncertainty-aware interaction. A pilot diagnostic set of 91 edge cases and four contemporary models illustrates that ordinary helpfulness and safety readings can miss process failures that edge-aware evaluation exposes. We outline operational edge signals, process-aware evaluation criteria, and a three-phase process stack that reframes alignment as a lifecycle problem of dynamic normative governance.
title AI Alignment Breaks at the Edge
topic Computation and Language
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.20042