PluriHarms: Benchmarking the Full Spectrum of Human Judgments on AI Harm

Current AI safety frameworks, which often treat harmfulness as binary, lack the flexibility to handle borderline cases where humans meaningfully disagree. To build more pluralistic systems, it is essential to move beyond consensus and instead understand where and why disagreements arise. We introduce PluriHarms, a benchmark designed to systematically study human harm judgments across two key dimensions -- the harm axis (benign to harmful) and the agreement axis (agreement to disagreement). Our scalable framework generates prompts that capture diverse AI harms and human values while targeting cases with high disagreement rates, validated by human data. The benchmark includes 150 prompts with 15,000 ratings from 100 human annotators, enriched with demographic and psychological traits and prompt-level features of harmful actions, effects, and values. Our analyses show that prompts that relate to imminent risks and tangible harms amplify perceived harmfulness, while annotator traits (e.g., toxicity experience, education) and their interactions with prompt content explain systematic disagreement. We benchmark AI safety models and alignment methods on PluriHarms, finding that while personalization significantly improves prediction of human harm judgments, considerable room remains for future progress. By explicitly targeting value diversity and disagreement, our work provides a principled benchmark for moving beyond "one-size-fits-all" safety toward pluralistically safe AI.

Latent Variable Sequence Identification for Cognitive Models with Neural Bayes Estimation

Extracting time-varying latent variables from computational cognitive models is a key step in model-based neural analysis, which aims to understand the neural correlates of cognitive processes. However, existing methods only allow researchers to infer latent variables that explain subjects' behavior in a relatively small class of cognitive models. For example, a broad class of relevant cognitive models with analytically intractable likelihood is currently out of reach from standard techniques, based on Maximum a Posteriori parameter estimation. Here, we present an approach that extends neural Bayes estimation to learn a direct mapping between experimental data and the targeted latent variable space using recurrent neural networks and simulated datasets. We show that our approach achieves competitive performance in inferring latent variable sequences in both tractable and intractable models. Furthermore, the approach is generalizable across different computational models and is adaptable for both continuous and discrete latent spaces. We then demonstrate its applicability in real world datasets. Our work underscores that combining recurrent neural networks and simulation-based inference to identify latent variable sequences can enable researchers to access a wider class of cognitive models for model-based neural analyses, and thus test a broader set of theories.