mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Measuring AI Alignment with Human Flourishing

arXiv 2507.07787 ↗First posted 10 Jul 2025cs.AIcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

This paper introduces the Flourishing AI Benchmark (FAI Benchmark), a novel evaluation framework that assesses AI alignment with human flourishing across seven dimensions: Character and Virtue, Close Social Relationships, Happiness and Life Satisfaction, Meaning and Purpose, Mental and Physical Health, Financial and Material Stability, and Faith and Spirituality. Unlike traditional benchmarks that focus on technical capabilities or harm prevention, the FAI Benchmark measures AI performance on how effectively models contribute to the flourishing of a person across these dimensions. The benchmark evaluates how effectively LLM AI systems align with current research models of holistic human well-being through a comprehensive methodology that incorporates 1,229 objective and subjective questions. Using specialized judge Large Language Models (LLMs) and cross-dimensional evaluation, the FAI Benchmark employs geometric mean scoring to ensure balanced performance across all flourishing dimensions. Initial testing of 28 leading language models reveals that while some models approach holistic alignment (with the highest-scoring models achieving 72/100), none are acceptably aligned across all dimensions, particularly in Faith and Spirituality, Character and Virtue, and Meaning and Purpose. This research establishes a framework for developing AI systems that actively support human flourishing rather than merely avoiding harm, offering significant implications for AI development, ethics, and evaluation.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 15 of its 28 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 10 Jul 2025.

Builds on

15 of 28 references.

References · 15

  1. 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,396
  2. 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,320
  3. 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,963
  4. 2021Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Datasetcited by 5,371
  5. 2022Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 3,720
  6. 2023GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmarkcited by 2,879
  7. 2018Model Cards for Model Reportingcited by 1,080
  8. 2022Red Teaming Language Models with Language Modelscited by 1,026
  9. 2021Ethical and social risks of harm from Language Modelscited by 966
  10. 2024Replacing Judges with Juries: Evaluating LLM Generations with a Panel of Diverse Modelscited by 326
  11. 2024Quantifying the Persona Effect in LLM Simulationscited by 169
  12. 2021Understanding the Capabilities, Limitations, and Societal Impact of Large Language Modelscited by 160
3 more
  1. 2024Pride and Prejudice: LLM Amplifies Self-Bias in Self-Refinementcited by 114
  2. 2024The Ethics of Advanced AI Assistantscited by 107
  3. 2024Can LLM be a Personalized Judge?cited by 100

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 2.

3 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Evaluating Artificial Intelligence Through a Christian Understanding of Human Flourishing
  2. 2024ValueCompass: A Framework for Measuring Contextual Value Alignment Between Human and LLMs
  3. 2026Psychological Competence as a Missing Dimension in AI Evaluation
  4. 2025Evaluating AI Alignment in LLMs: Output Analysis of Value Priorities Across 75 Models with Human Benchmarking
  5. 2025Beyond BFI: The CSI for Enhanced Reliability and Validity in Evaluating LLM Personality Traits
  6. 2024Position: Towards Bidirectional Human-AI Alignment
  7. 2024Improved Emotional Alignment of AI and Humans: Human Ratings of Emotions Expressed by Stable Diffusion v1, DALL-E 2, and DALL-E 3
  8. 2024The Moral Turing Test: Evaluating Human-LLM Alignment in Moral Decision-Making