mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Expectation Alignment: Handling Reward Misspecification in the Presence of Expectation Mismatch

arXiv 2404.08791 ↗First posted 12 Apr 2024cs.AI cs.LGcited by 1

On the map: LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation → Reward modeling and RLHF

Abstract (arXiv)

Detecting and handling misspecified objectives, such as reward functions, has been widely recognized as one of the central challenges within the domain of Artificial Intelligence (AI) safety research. However, even with the recognition of the importance of this problem, we are unaware of any works that attempt to provide a clear definition for what constitutes (a) misspecified objectives and (b) successfully resolving such misspecifications. In this work, we use the theory of mind, i.e., the human user's beliefs about the AI agent, as a basis to develop a formal explanatory framework called Expectation Alignment (EAL) to understand the objective misspecification and its causes. Our EAL framework not only acts as an explanatory framework for existing works but also provides us with concrete insights into the limitations of existing methods to handle reward misspecification and novel solution strategies. We use these insights to propose a new interactive algorithm that uses the specified reward to infer potential user expectations about the system behavior. We show how one can efficiently implement this algorithm by mapping the inference problem into linear programs. We evaluate our method on a set of standard Markov Decision Process (MDP) benchmarks.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Reward modeling and RLHF, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation. Builds on 13 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 Apr 2024.

Builds on

13 of 38 references.

References · 13

  1. 2022The Effects of Reward Misspecification: Mapping and Mitigating Misaligned Modelscited by 312
  2. 2016Cooperative Inverse Reinforcement Learningcited by 298
  3. 2018A Survey of Inverse Reinforcement Learning: Challenges, Methods and Progresscited by 294
  4. 2017Inverse Reward Designcited by 246
  5. 2020Reward-rational (implicit) choice: A unifying formalism for reward learningcited by 119
  6. 2019Recent Advances in Imitation Learning from Observationcited by 92
  7. 2021On the Expressivity of Markov Rewardcited by 71
  8. 2018Where Do You Think You're Going?: Inferring Beliefs about Dynamics from Behaviorcited by 40
  9. 2022Misspecification in Inverse Reinforcement Learningcited by 27
  10. 2017Should Robots be Obedient?cited by 20
  11. 2021Combining Reward Information from Multiple Sourcescited by 7
  12. 2020Avoiding Negative Side Effects due to Incomplete Knowledge of AI Systemscited by 5
1 more
  1. 2023Goal Alignment: A Human-Aware Account of Value Alignment Problemcited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2021Choice Set Misspecification in Reward Inference
  2. 2024Measuring Error Alignment for Decision-Making Systems
  3. 2024AI Alignment with Changing and Influenceable Reward Functions
  4. 2023Of Models and Tin Men: A Behavioural Economics Study of Principal-Agent Problems in AI Alignment using Large-Language Models
  5. 2018Scalable agent alignment via reward modeling: a research direction
  6. 2026Revisiting scaling laws for reward optimization
  7. 2025The Alignment Auditor: A Bayesian Framework for Verifying and Refining LLM Objectives
  8. 2026Reward Shaping for (Inference-Time) Alignment: A Stackelberg Game Perspective