# Measuring AI Alignment with Human Flourishing

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.07787 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.07787/

## 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 (most cited first, 15 of 15)

- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Code](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2107.03374/) (2021)
- [Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.03300/) (2020)
- [Measuring Mathematical Problem Solving With the MATH Dataset](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2103.03874/) (2021)
- [Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.05862/) (2022)
- [GPQA: A Graduate-Level Google-Proof Q&A Benchmark](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.12022/) (2023)
- [Model Cards for Model Reporting](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1810.03993/) (2018)
- [Red Teaming Language Models with Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.03286/) (2022)
- [Ethical and social risks of harm from Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.04359/) (2021)
- [Replacing Judges with Juries: Evaluating LLM Generations with a Panel of Diverse Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.18796/) (2024)
- [Quantifying the Persona Effect in LLM Simulations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.10811/) (2024)
- [Understanding the Capabilities, Limitations, and Societal Impact of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2102.02503/) (2021)
- [Pride and Prejudice: LLM Amplifies Self-Bias in Self-Refinement](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.11436/) (2024)
- [The Ethics of Advanced AI Assistants](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.16244/) (2024)
- [Can LLM be a Personalized Judge?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.11657/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 3 of 3)

- [Positive Alignment: Artificial Intelligence for Human Flourishing](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.10310/) (2026)
- [The PacifAIst Benchmark:Would an Artificial Intelligence Choose to Sacrifice Itself for Human Safety?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.09762/) (2025)
- [Optimising for Flourishing: Flourishing Metrics and Return on Flourishing as Success Criteria for Artificial Intelligence and Post-AGI Economic Systems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.00151/) (2026)

## 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.