PACIFIC: Can LLMs Discern the Psychometric Traits Influencing Your Preferences? Personality-Driven Preference Alignment in LLMs
On the map: LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation → Human values and AI feedback alignment
Abstract (arXiv)
User preferences are increasingly used to personalize Large Language Model (LLM) responses, yet reliably leveraging preference signals remains under-explored. In practice, preferences can be noisy, incomplete, or even misleading, which can degrade answer quality when applied naively. Motivated by the observation that stable personality traits shape everyday preferences, we introduce PACIFIC (Preference Alignment for Choices Inference via Five-factor Identity Characterization), a personality-driven preference alignment framework that uses Big-Five (OCEAN) traits as a principled "latent" signal for organizing and reasoning over user preference history. To systematically evaluate this framework, we construct a psychometrics-based dataset containing 1,200 preference-query pairs spanning diverse domains (e.g., travel, movies, and education), with comprehensive coverage of high and low Big-Five trait directions. Extensive experiments show that trait-aligned preferences substantially improve personalized QA: given clean, trait-aligned context, LLMs reach near-ceiling accuracy (up to 99%), confirming that reasoning capability is not the bottleneck. The challenge is that real histories are mixed-trait and unlabeled. We show the true bottleneck is retrieval: a persona-aware contrastive retriever (PiRAG) raises label-free accuracy from 30% to 43% over standard semantic retrieval, without any trait annotations at inference.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Human values and AI feedback alignment, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation. Builds on 11 of its 29 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Feb 2026.
Builds on
11 of 29 references.
References · 11
- 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
- 2023GPT-4 Technical Reportcited by 18,132
- 2020Dense Passage Retrieval for Open-Domain Question Answeringcited by 3,779
- 2023LaMP: When Large Language Models Meet Personalizationcited by 425
- 2025Know Me, Respond to Me: Benchmarking LLMs for Dynamic User Profiling and Personalized Responses at Scalecited by 163
- 2025Do LLMs Recognize Your Preferences? Evaluating Personalized Preference Following in LLMscited by 142
- 2022Evaluating and Inducing Personality in Pre-trained Language Modelscited by 122
- 2022Same Author or Just Same Topic? Towards Content-Independent Style Representationscited by 83
- 2024BIG5-CHAT: Shaping LLM Personalities Through Training on Human-Grounded Datacited by 49
- 2024Proxona: Supporting Creators' Sensemaking and Ideation with LLM-Powered Audience Personascited by 19
- 2025Too Good to be Bad: On the Failure of LLMs to Role-Play Villainscited by 10
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Evaluating LLM Alignment on Personality Inference from Real-World Interview Data
- 2024Personality Alignment of Large Language Models
- 2024Aligning LLMs with Individual Preferences via Interaction
- 2024PersonalLLM: Tailoring LLMs to Individual Preferences
- 2025Towards Understanding Valuable Preference Data for Large Language Model Alignment
- 2025Persistent Instability in LLM's Personality Measurements: Effects of Scale, Reasoning, and Conversation History
- 2025Can LLMs Infer Personality from Real World Conversations?
- 2025Alignment Revisited: Are Large Language Models Consistent in Stated and Revealed Preferences?