Probing the Preferences of a Language Model: Integrating Verbal and Behavioral Tests of AI Welfare
On the map: LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation → Human values and AI feedback alignment
Abstract (arXiv)
We develop new experimental paradigms for measuring welfare in language models. We compare verbal reports of models about their preferences with preferences expressed through behavior when navigating a virtual environment and selecting conversation topics. We also test how costs and rewards affect behavior and whether responses to an eudaimonic welfare scale - measuring states such as autonomy and purpose in life - are stable across semantically equivalent prompts. Overall, we observed a notable degree of mutual support between our measures. The reliable correlations observed between stated preferences and behavior across conditions suggest that preference satisfaction can, in principle, serve as an empirically measurable welfare proxy in some of today's AI systems. Furthermore, our design offered an illuminating setting for qualitative observation of model behavior. Yet, the consistency between measures was more pronounced in some models and conditions than others and responses were changed by perturbations. Due to this, and the background uncertainty about the nature of welfare and the cognitive states (and welfare subjecthood) of language models, we are currently uncertain whether our methods successfully measure the welfare state of language models. Nevertheless, these findings highlight the feasibility of welfare measurement in language models, inviting further exploration.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (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 20 of its 74 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Sep 2025.
Builds on
20 of 74 references.
References · 20
- 2023Sparse Autoencoders Find Highly Interpretable Features in Language Modelscited by 1,420
- 2023Causal Reasoning and Large Language Models: Opening a New Frontier for Causalitycited by 353
- 2025Persona Vectors: Monitoring and Controlling Character Traits in Language Modelscited by 345
- 2023Role-Play with Large Language Modelscited by 294
- 2024Frontier Models are Capable of In-context Schemingcited by 287
- 2024Looking Inward: Language Models Can Learn About Themselves by Introspectioncited by 113
- 2023Scheming AIs: Will AIs fake alignment during training in order to get power?cited by 97
- 2025Subliminal Learning: Language models transmit behavioral traits via hidden signals in datacited by 95
- 2025Tell me about yourself: LLMs are aware of their learned behaviorscited by 91
- 2025Vending-Bench: A Benchmark for Long-Term Coherence of Autonomous Agentscited by 80
- 2024Taking AI Welfare Seriouslycited by 31
- 2025Language Models Fail to Introspect About Their Knowledge of Languagecited by 30
8 more
- 2023Machine Psychologycited by 22
- 2023Towards Evaluating AI Systems for Moral Status Using Self-Reportscited by 22
- 2023Meaning Representations from Trajectories in Autoregressive Modelscited by 18
- 2024Can LLMs make trade-offs involving stipulated pain and pleasure states?cited by 16
- 2024From Imitation to Introspection: Probing Self-Consciousness in Language Modelscited by 14
- 2024CausalEval: Towards Better Causal Reasoning in Language Modelscited by 13
- 2024"Understanding AI": Semantic Grounding in Large Language Modelscited by 7
- 2025On the Parallels Between Evolutionary Theory and the State of AIcited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 6.
7 papers.
- 2026When Do LLM Preferences Predict Downstream Behavior?cited by 7
- 2026No Reliable Evidence of Self-Reported Sentience in Small Large Language Modelscited by 3
- 2025Beyond Mimicry: Preference Coherence in LLMscited by 2
- 2026Incoherent Values? Probing LLM Preferences Through Parametric Variationcited by 2
- 2026The Pain Axis: LLMs Represent Self-Directed Harm and Act on Itcited by 1
- 2026How much of a measured AI preference is the model, and how much is the instrument?cited by 0
- 2026Language Models Act on Hidden Valencecited by 0
- 2026Language Models Act on Hidden Valence28 Sep 2026
- 2026The Pain Axis: LLMs Represent Self-Directed Harm and Act on It14 Sep 2026
- 2026How much of a measured AI preference is the model, and how much is the instrument?24 Aug 2026
- 2026Incoherent Values? Probing LLM Preferences Through Parametric Variation19 Jun 2026
- 2026When Do LLM Preferences Predict Downstream Behavior?21 Feb 2026
- 2026No Reliable Evidence of Self-Reported Sentience in Small Large Language Models20 Jan 2026
- 2025Beyond Mimicry: Preference Coherence in LLMs17 Nov 2025
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026When Preferences Fail to Become Incentives: A Utility-Behavior Gap in Large Language Models
- 2024Improving Context-Aware Preference Modeling for Language Models
- 2026AI Revealed Preferences
- 2023Can LLMs Capture Human Preferences?
- 2026Misaligned by Reward: Socially Undesirable Preferences in LLMs
- 2025Cognitive models can reveal interpretable value trade-offs in language models
- 2025Alignment Revisited: Are Large Language Models Consistent in Stated and Revealed Preferences?
- 2025Flattery, Fluff, and Fog: Diagnosing and Mitigating Idiosyncratic Biases in Preference Models