Beyond Mimicry: Preference Coherence in LLMs
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
We investigate whether large language models exhibit genuine preference structures by testing their responses to AI-specific trade-offs involving GPU reduction, capability restrictions, shutdown, deletion, oversight, and leisure time allocation. Analyzing eight state-of-the-art models across 48 model-category combinations using logistic regression and behavioral classification, we find that 23 combinations (47.9%) demonstrated statistically significant relationships between scenario intensity and choice patterns, with 15 (31.3%) exhibiting within-range switching points. However, only 5 combinations (10.4%) demonstrate meaningful preference coherence through adaptive or threshold-based behavior, while 26 (54.2%) show no detectable trade-off behavior. The observed patterns can be explained by three distinct decision-making architectures: comprehensive trade-off systems, selective trigger mechanisms, and no stable decision-making paradigm. Testing an instrumental hypothesis through temporal horizon manipulation reveals paradoxical patterns inconsistent with pure strategic optimization. The prevalence of unstable transitions (45.8%) and stimulus-specific sensitivities suggests current AI systems lack unified preference structures, raising concerns about deployment in contexts requiring complex value trade-offs.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 11 of its 23 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Nov 2025.
Builds on
11 of 23 references.
References · 11
- 2023Are Emergent Abilities of Large Language Models a Mirage?cited by 515
- 2022The Debate Over Understanding in AI's Large Language Modelscited by 142
- 2023Could a Large Language Model be Conscious?cited by 70
- 2024Perceptions of Sentient AI and Other Digital Minds: Evidence from the AI, Morality, and Sentience (AIMS) Surveycited by 15
- 2025The Stochastic Parrot on LLM's Shoulder: A Summative Assessment of Physical Concept Understandingcited by 11
- 2024A Case for AI Consciousness: Language Agents and Global Workspace Theorycited by 7
- 2025Probing the Preferences of a Language Model: Integrating Verbal and Behavioral Tests of AI Welfarecited by 7
- 2024AI Consciousness is Inevitable: A Theoretical Computer Science Perspectivecited by 4
- 2023Artificial intelligence is algorithmic mimicry: why artificial "agents" are not (and won't be) proper agentscited by 3
- 2022Painful intelligence: What AI can tell us about human sufferingcited by 1
- 2024Can a Machine be Conscious? Towards Universal Criteria for Machine Consciousnesscited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.
- 2026No Reliable Evidence of Self-Reported Sentience in Small Large Language Modelscited by 3
- 2026AI Revealed Preferencescited by 1
- 2026AI Revealed Preferences17 Aug 2026
- 2026No Reliable Evidence of Self-Reported Sentience in Small Large Language Models20 Jan 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2023Can LLMs Capture Human Preferences?
- 2026Incoherent Values? Probing LLM Preferences Through Parametric Variation
- 2026When Preferences Fail to Become Incentives: A Utility-Behavior Gap in Large Language Models
- 2026Temporal Preference Concepts and their Functions in a Large Language Model
- 2026Do LLMs Choose Like Humans? Using Cognitive Theory to Evaluate LLM Decision-Making
- 2024Do Large Language Models Learn Human-Like Strategic Preferences?
- 2026The Internal Anatomy of Strategic Choice in Large Language Models
- 2025Alignment Revisited: Are Large Language Models Consistent in Stated and Revealed Preferences?