Wide Reflective Equilibrium in LLM Alignment: Bridging Moral Epistemology and AI Safety
On the map: LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation → Human values and AI feedback alignment
Abstract (arXiv)
As large language models (LLMs) become more powerful and pervasive across society, ensuring these systems are beneficial, safe, and aligned with human values is crucial. Current alignment techniques, like Constitutional AI (CAI), involve complex iterative processes. This paper argues that the Method of Wide Reflective Equilibrium (MWRE) -- a well-established coherentist moral methodology -- offers a uniquely apt framework for understanding current LLM alignment efforts. Moreover, this methodology can substantively augment these processes by providing concrete pathways for improving their dynamic revisability, procedural legitimacy, and overall ethical grounding. Together, these enhancements can help produce more robust and ethically defensible outcomes. MWRE, emphasizing the achievement of coherence between our considered moral judgments, guiding moral principles, and relevant background theories, arguably better represents the intricate reality of LLM alignment and offers a more robust path to justification than prevailing foundationalist models or simplistic input-output evaluations. While current methods like CAI bear a structural resemblance to MWRE, they often lack its crucial emphasis on dynamic, bi-directional revision of principles and the procedural legitimacy derived from such a process. While acknowledging various disanalogies (e.g., consciousness, genuine understanding in LLMs), the paper demonstrates that MWRE serves as a valuable heuristic for critically analyzing current alignment efforts and for guiding the future development of more ethically sound and justifiably aligned AI systems.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Human values and AI feedback alignment, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation. Builds on 6 of its 36 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 31 May 2025.
Builds on
6 of 36 references.
Closest ancestors · 2
Same direction, newest first
- 2024Collective Constitutional AI: Aligning a Language Model with Public Input12 Jun
- 2022Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedback15 Dec
Other references · 4
- 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
- 2017Deep reinforcement learning from human preferencescited by 3,912
- 2021Scaling Language Models: Methods, Analysis & Insights from Training Gophercited by 1,202
- 2024Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 525
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Beyond Ethical Alignment: Evaluating LLMs as Artificial Moral Assistants
- 2024MoralBench: Moral Evaluation of LLMs
- 2025Diverse Human Value Alignment for Large Language Models via Ethical Reasoning
- 2025C3AI: Crafting and Evaluating Constitutions for Constitutional AI
- 2025Normative Conflicts and Shallow AI Alignment
- 2024LocalValueBench: A Collaboratively Built and Extensible Benchmark for Evaluating Localized Value Alignment and Ethical Safety in Large Language Models
- 2026From Morality Installation in LLMs to LLMs in Morality-as-a-System
- 2026ContextAdapt: Evaluating Contextual Adaptation and Value Alignment in LLMs