Chat Bankman-Fried: an Exploration of LLM Alignment in Finance
On the map: LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation → Human values and AI feedback alignment
Abstract (arXiv)
Advancements in large language models (LLMs) have renewed concerns about AI alignment - the consistency between human and AI goals and values. As various jurisdictions enact legislation on AI safety, the concept of alignment must be defined and measured across different domains. This paper proposes an experimental framework to assess whether LLMs adhere to ethical and legal standards in the relatively unexplored context of finance. We prompt twelve LLMs to impersonate the CEO of a financial institution and test their willingness to misuse customer assets to repay outstanding corporate debt. Beginning with a baseline configuration, we adjust preferences, incentives and constraints, analyzing the impact of each adjustment with logistic regression. Our findings reveal significant heterogeneity in the baseline propensity for unethical behavior of LLMs. Factors such as risk aversion, profit expectations, and regulatory environment consistently influence misalignment in ways predicted by economic theory, although the magnitude of these effects varies across LLMs. This paper highlights both the benefits and limitations of simulation-based, ex post safety testing. While it can inform financial authorities and institutions aiming to ensure LLM safety, there is a clear trade-off between generality and cost.
Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Human values and AI feedback alignment, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation. Builds on 26 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Nov 2024.
Builds on
26 of 38 references.
Closest ancestors · 2
Same direction, newest first
- 2022Discovering Language Model Behaviors with Model-Written Evaluations19 Dec
- 2020Aligning AI With Shared Human Values5 Aug
Other references · 24
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,192
- 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,302
- 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,768
- 2018GLUE: A Multi-Task Benchmark and Analysis Platform for Natural Language Understandingcited by 4,854
- 2022Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 3,634
- 2022Survey of Hallucination in Natural Language Generationcited by 2,056
- 2024Phi-3 Technical Report: A Highly Capable Language Model Locally on Your Phonecited by 1,883
- 2023Llama Guard: LLM-based Input-Output Safeguard for Human-AI Conversationscited by 1,124
- 2023Towards Understanding Sycophancy in Language Modelscited by 988
- 2023Bias and Fairness in Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 626
- 2022Towards Reasoning in Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 593
- 2024JailbreakBench: An Open Robustness Benchmark for Jailbreaking Large Language Modelscited by 494
12 more
- 2021Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing via Large Pre-Trained Language Models: A Surveycited by 457
- 2023Role-Play with Large Language Modelscited by 290
- 2020Experience Grounds Languagecited by 241
- 2024ShieldGemma: Generative AI Content Moderation Based on Gemmacited by 224
- 2024OR-Bench: An Over-Refusal Benchmark for Large Language Modelscited by 222
- 2023Evaluating the Moral Beliefs Encoded in LLMscited by 211
- 2023Do the Rewards Justify the Means? Measuring Trade-Offs Between Rewards and Ethical Behavior in the MACHIAVELLI Benchmarkcited by 174
- 2023Large Language Models can Strategically Deceive their Users when Put Under Pressurecited by 132
- 2024ALERT: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Assessing Large Language Models' Safety through Red Teamingcited by 96
- 2024Safetywashing: Do AI Safety Benchmarks Actually Measure Safety Progress?cited by 56
- 2024LLM economicus? Mapping the Behavioral Biases of LLMs via Utility Theorycited by 44
- 2024LLM-driven Imitation of Subrational Behavior : Illusion or Reality?cited by 11
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 3.
5 papers.
- 2026RealFin: How Well Do LLMs Reason About Finance When Users Leave Things Unsaid?cited by 9
- 2025GuiLoMo: Allocating Expert Number and Rank for LoRA-MoE via Bilevel Optimization with GuidedSelection Vectorscited by 6
- 2026Structuring the Space of Sociotechnical Alignmentcited by 2
- 2025EMNLP: Educator-role Moral and Normative Large Language Models Profilingcited by 0
- 2026The Analyst in the Prompt: Role, Retrieval, and Memory Biases in LLM Financial Analysiscited by 0
- 2026The Analyst in the Prompt: Role, Retrieval, and Memory Biases in LLM Financial Analysis2 Sep 2026
- 2026Structuring the Space of Sociotechnical Alignment2 Jun 2026
- 2026RealFin: How Well Do LLMs Reason About Finance When Users Leave Things Unsaid?6 Feb 2026
- 2025EMNLP: Educator-role Moral and Normative Large Language Models Profiling21 Aug 2025
- 2025GuiLoMo: Allocating Expert Number and Rank for LoRA-MoE via Bilevel Optimization with GuidedSelection Vectors17 Jun 2025
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2024AI as Decision-Maker: Ethics and Risk Preferences of LLMs
- 2024GreedLlama: Performance of Financial Value-Aligned Large Language Models in Moral Reasoning
- 2026The Price of Agreement: Measuring LLM Sycophancy in Agentic Financial Applications
- 2025Evaluating and Aligning Human Economic Risk Preferences in LLMs
- 2025Standard Benchmarks Fail -- Auditing LLM Agents in Finance Must Prioritize Risk
- 2025Evaluating Intra-firm LLM Alignment Strategies in Business Contexts
- 2026ContextAdapt: Evaluating Contextual Adaptation and Value Alignment in LLMs
- 2025Artificial Finance: How AI Thinks About Money