mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Generating Fair Consensus Statements with Social Choice on Token-Level MDPs

arXiv 2510.14106 ↗First posted 15 Oct 2025cs.AI cs.CL cs.GTcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Current frameworks for consensus statement generation with large language models lack the inherent structure needed to provide provable fairness guarantees when aggregating diverse free-form opinions. We model the task as a multi-objective, token-level Markov Decision Process (MDP), where each objective corresponds to an agent's preference. Token-level rewards for each agent are derived from their policy (e.g., a personalized language model). This approach utilizes the finding that such policies implicitly define optimal Q-functions, providing a principled way to quantify rewards at each generation step without a value function (Rafailov et al., 2024). This MDP formulation creates a formal structure amenable to analysis using principles from social choice theory. We propose two approaches grounded in social choice theory. First, we propose a stochastic generation policy guaranteed to be in the ex-ante core, extending core stability concepts from voting theory to text generation. This policy is derived from an underlying distribution over complete statements that maximizes proportional fairness (Nash Welfare). Second, for generating a single statement, we target the maximization of egalitarian welfare using search algorithms within the MDP framework. Empirically, experiments using language models to instantiate agent policies show that search guided by the egalitarian objective generates consensus statements with improved worst-case agent alignment compared to baseline methods, including the Habermas Machine (Tessler et al., 2024).

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 32 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Oct 2025.

Builds on

18 of 32 references.

References · 18

  1. 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
  2. 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 8,065
  3. 2021Convex optimizationcited by 2,515
  4. 2023From Pretraining Data to Language Models to Downstream Tasks: Tracking the Trails of Political Biases Leading to Unfair NLP Modelscited by 260
  5. 2024From r to Q^*: Your Language Model is Secretly a Q-Functioncited by 242
  6. 2024Decoding-Time Language Model Alignment with Multiple Objectivescited by 94
  7. 2023Don't throw away your value model! Generating more preferable text with Value-Guided Monte-Carlo Tree Search decodingcited by 60
  8. 2024Value Augmented Sampling for Language Model Alignment and Personalizationcited by 49
  9. 2024Auctions with LLM Summariescited by 24
  10. 2018Fair Allocation of Indivisible Public Goodscited by 22
  11. 2016Fair Public Decision Makingcited by 21
  12. 2017Fair mixing: the case of dichotomous preferencescited by 14
6 more
  1. 2025Collab: Controlled Decoding using Mixture of Agents for LLM Alignmentcited by 14
  2. 2022Optimized Distortion and Proportional Fairness in Votingcited by 12
  3. 2025Generative Social Choice: The Next Generationcited by 10
  4. 2024Approximating the Core via Iterative Coalition Samplingcited by 5
  5. 2025AI-Enhanced Deliberative Democracy and the Future of the Collective Willcited by 4
  6. 2025Reflective Verbal Reward Design for Pluralistic Alignmentcited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.