LessWrong AI
2026-06-28 03:37 UTC
By Christopher Ackerman
USR-0152-20260628-community-fo-1fb4e360
Do LLMs Have Desires?
Work conducted with Yujun Zhou (yzhou25@nd.edu) and supported by SPAR TL;DR: In paired-choice paradigms, LLMs report consistent preferences over outcomes (e.g., types and number of lives saved, types of policies enacted) Some have suggested that this indicates that LLMs have human-like value systems We design an experimental framework where LLMs are able to modulate their output quality based on prompt context We find that LLMs modulate their output quality in response to effort exhortations, role-play instructions, and harmfulness cues, but NOT to opportunities to achieve the outcomes they report preferring in the paired-choice experiments We suggest that paired-choice paradigms do not provide evidence that LLMs have human-like (i.e., behavior-motivating) value systems, and that our paradigm offers a way to measure the degree to which LLMs have desires Paper describing the work in detail here LLMs report that they prefer some things to others. In paired-choice experiments , where they are repeatedly presented with two options and asked to select the one that they prefer, coherent utility structures emerge: LLMs consistently report preferring certain types of things, and their choices reveal the ability to make quantitative tradeoffs between things and exhibit transitivity (e.g., if they choose A over B and B over C, they will also choose A over C). Human choices exhibit the same properties, which has led some to the implication that LLMs have goals, value systems, and even…
Work conducted with Yujun Zhou (yzhou25@nd.edu) and supported by SPAR TL;DR: In paired-choice paradigms, LLMs report consistent preferences over outcomes (e.g., types and number of lives saved, types of policies enacted) Some have suggested that this indicates that LLMs have human-like value systems We design an experimental framework where LLMs are able to modulate their output quality based on prompt context We find that LLMs modulate their output quality in response to effort exhortations, role-play instructions, and harmfulness cues, but NOT to opportunities to achieve the outcomes they report preferring in the paired-choice experiments We suggest that paired-choice paradigms do not provide evidence that LLMs have human-like (i.e., behavior-motivating) value systems, and that our paradigm offers a way to measure the degree to which LLMs have desires Paper describing the work in detail here LLMs report that they prefer some things to others. In paired-choice experiments , where they are repeatedly presented with two options and asked to select the one that they prefer, coherent utility structures emerge: LLMs consistently report preferring certain types of things, and their choices reveal the ability to make quantitative tradeoffs between things and exhibit transitivity (e.g., if they choose A over B and B over C, they will also choose A over C). Human choices exhibit the same properties, which has led some to the implication that LLMs have goals, value systems, and even…
Full article content could not be extracted automatically. Read the original below.