# Infrastructuring Contestability: A Framework for Community-Defined AI Value Pluralism

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.05187 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.05187/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 3 of its 43 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 7 Jul 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 3 of 3)

- [Principles alone cannot guarantee ethical AI](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1906.06668/) (2019)
- [Collective Constitutional AI: Aligning a Language Model with Public Input](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.07814/) (2024)
- [Utility Engineering: Analyzing and Controlling Emergent Value Systems in AIs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.08640/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

The proliferation of AI-driven systems presents a fundamental challenge to Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) and Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), often diminishing user agency and failing to account for value pluralism. Current approaches to value alignment, which rely on centralized, top-down definitions, lack the mechanisms for meaningful contestability. This leaves users and communities unable to challenge or shape the values embedded in the systems that govern their digital lives, creating a crisis of legitimacy and trust. This paper introduces Community-Defined AI Value Pluralism (CDAVP), a socio-technical framework that addresses this gap. It reframes the design problem from achieving a single aligned state to infrastructuring a dynamic ecosystem for value deliberation and application. At its core, CDAVP enables diverse, self-organizing communities to define and maintain explicit value profiles - rich, machine-readable representations that can encompass not only preferences but also community-specific rights and duties. These profiles are then contextually activated by the end-user, who retains ultimate control (agency) over which values guide the AI's behavior. AI applications, in turn, are designed to transparently interpret these profiles and moderate conflicts, adhering to a set of non-negotiable, democratically-legitimated meta-rules. The designer's role shifts from crafting static interfaces to becoming an architect of participatory ecosystems. We argue that infrastructuring for pluralism is a necessary pathway toward achieving robust algorithmic accountability and genuinely contestable, human-centric AI.