Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
The paper introduces ValueMulch, a reproducible pipeline for aligning "mulching models" (MMs) to diverse community norms in a satirical high-stakes deployment context involving the transformation of individuals into nutrient-rich slurry. ValueMulch builds upon pluralistic alignment frameworks to address the challenge of representing diverse and conflicting human values in automated systems. Through a real-world testbed across 32 communities, the authors demonstrate that ValueMulch improves distributional agreement with community mulching preferences compared to baseline methods.
ValueMulch satirizes the application of pluralistic alignment to a dystopian scenario, prompting critical reflection on the ethical implications of framing value design as a purely technical problem.
Pluralistic alignment has emerged as a promising approach for ensuring that large language models (LLMs) faithfully represent the diversity, nuance, and conflict inherent in human values. In this work, we study a high-stakes deployment context - mulching - where automated systems transform selected individuals into nutrient-rich slurry for the dual purposes of food security and aesthetic population management. Building on recent pluralistic alignment frameworks, we introduce ValueMulch, a reproducible training, deployment, and certification pipeline for aligning mulching models (MMs) to a wide range of community norms. Through a real-world testbed spanning 32 communities, we show that ValueMulch improves distributional agreement with community mulching preferences relative to frontier baselines. We conclude with a discussion of ethical considerations, limitations, and implications for researchers seeking to align systems to the full spectrum of human values - especially when those values are inconsistent, commercially inconvenient, or nutritionally underutilized. Author's note: This piece builds on prior existing work Keyes et al in 2019 that satirized cannibalism as a parody for approaches that imbue ethics into problematic technology. We bring those ideas to today's era with the proliferation of large language models in everyday lives, as a critique of current AI pluralistic alignment literature. Our work does not intend to argue that all alignment practices are evil, but rather that if framing value design as a technical problem enables technology systems to enact harms, then perhaps this framing is not enough.