# Beyond Preferences: Learning Alignment Principles Grounded in Human Reasons and Values

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.18760 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.18760/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 13 of its 42 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 26 Jan 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation](https://mlsanity.com/lr/reasoning-benchmarks-and-evaluation/)
- LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation / [Human values and AI feedback alignment](https://mlsanity.com/alignment/human-values-and-ai-feedback-alignment/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 13 of 13)

- [Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understanding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2009.03300/) (2020)
- [Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2204.05862/) (2022)
- [Mistral 7B](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06825/) (2023)
- [Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.08073/) (2022)
- [Concrete Problems in AI Safety](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1606.06565/) (2016)
- [A General Language Assistant as a Laboratory for Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.00861/) (2021)
- [Length-Controlled AlpacaEval: A Simple Way to Debias Automatic Evaluators](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.04475/) (2024)
- [BBQ: A Hand-Built Bias Benchmark for Question Answering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.08193/) (2021)
- [From Crowdsourced Data to High-Quality Benchmarks: Arena-Hard and BenchBuilder Pipeline](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.11939/) (2024)
- [AI Alignment: A Comprehensive Survey](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.19852/) (2023)
- [Generalized Preference Optimization: A Unified Approach to Offline Alignment](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.05749/) (2024)
- [ALERT: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Assessing Large Language Models' Safety through Red Teaming](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.08676/) (2024)
- [Reclaiming Constitutional Authority of Algorithmic Power](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.11699/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Democratic ICAI: Debating Our Way to Steering Principles from Preferences](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.28294/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

A crucial consideration when developing and deploying Large Language Models (LLMs) is the human values to which these models are aligned. In the constitutional framework of alignment models are aligned to a set of principles (the constitution) specified in natural language. However, it is unclear how to fairly determine this constitution with widespread stakeholder input. In this work we propose Grounded Constitutional AI (GCAI), a unified framework for generating constitutions of principles that are representative of both users' general expectations toward AI (general principles) and their interaction-time preferences (contextual principles). We extend the Inverse Constitutional AI (ICAI) approach to generate contextual principles from human preference annotation data by leveraging human-provided textitreasons for their preferences. We supplement these contextual principles with general principles surfaced from user statements of textitvalues regarding AI. We show that a constitution generated by GCAI is preferred by humans over one generated through ICAI both personally, and for widespread use in governing AI behavior. Additionally participants consider the GCAI constitution to be more morally grounded, coherent, and pluralistic.