Research on Superalignment Should Advance Now with Parallel Optimization of Competence and Conformity

The recent leap in AI capabilities, driven by big generative models, has sparked the possibility of achieving Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) and further triggered discussions on Artificial Superintelligence (ASI), a system surpassing all humans across all domains. This gives rise to the critical research question of: If we realize ASI, how do we align it with human values, ensuring it benefits rather than harms human society, a.k.a., the Superalignment problem. Despite ASI being regarded by many as solely a hypothetical concept, in this paper, we argue that superalignment is achievable and research on it should advance immediately, through simultaneous and alternating optimization of task competence and value conformity. We posit that superalignment is not merely a safeguard for ASI but also necessary for its realization. To support this position, we first provide a formal definition of superalignment rooted in the gap between capability and capacity and elaborate on our argument. Then we review existing paradigms, explore their interconnections and limitations, and illustrate a potential path to superalignment centered on two fundamental principles. We hope this work sheds light on a practical approach for developing the value-aligned next-generation AI, garnering greater benefits and reducing potential harms for humanity.

Linear Representations of Political Perspective Emerge in Large Language Models

Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated the ability to generate text that realistically reflects a range of different subjective human perspectives. This paper studies how LLMs are seemingly able to reflect more liberal versus more conservative viewpoints among other political perspectives in American politics. We show that LLMs possess linear representations of political perspectives within activation space, wherein more similar perspectives are represented closer together. To do so, we probe the attention heads across the layers of three open transformer-based LLMs (\texttt{Llama-2-7b-chat}, \texttt{Mistral-7b-instruct}, \texttt{Vicuna-7b}). We first prompt models to generate text from the perspectives of different U.S.~lawmakers. We then identify sets of attention heads whose activations linearly predict those lawmakers' DW-NOMINATE scores, a widely-used and validated measure of political ideology. We find that highly predictive heads are primarily located in the middle layers, often speculated to encode high-level concepts and tasks. Using probes only trained to predict lawmakers' ideology, we then show that the same probes can predict measures of news outlets' slant from the activations of models prompted to simulate text from those news outlets. These linear probes allow us to visualize, interpret, and monitor ideological stances implicitly adopted by an LLM as it generates open-ended responses. Finally, we demonstrate that by applying linear interventions to these attention heads, we can steer the model outputs toward a more liberal or conservative stance. Overall, our research suggests that LLMs possess a high-level linear representation of American political ideology and that by leveraging recent advances in mechanistic interpretability, we can identify, monitor, and steer the subjective perspective underlying generated text.

Hidden Persuaders: LLMs' Political Leaning and Their Influence on Voters

How could LLMs influence our democracy? We investigate LLMs' political leanings and the potential influence of LLMs on voters by conducting multiple experiments in a U.S. presidential election context. Through a voting simulation, we first demonstrate 18 open- and closed-weight LLMs' political preference for a Democratic nominee over a Republican nominee. We show how this leaning towards the Democratic nominee becomes more pronounced in instruction-tuned models compared to their base versions by analyzing their responses to candidate-policy related questions. We further explore the potential impact of LLMs on voter choice by conducting an experiment with 935 U.S. registered voters. During the experiments, participants interacted with LLMs (Claude-3, Llama-3, and GPT-4) over five exchanges. The experiment results show a shift in voter choices towards the Democratic nominee following LLM interaction, widening the voting margin from 0.7% to 4.6%, even though LLMs were not asked to persuade users to support the Democratic nominee during the discourse. This effect is larger than many previous studies on the persuasiveness of political campaigns, which have shown minimal effects in presidential elections. Many users also expressed a desire for further political interaction with LLMs. Which aspects of LLM interactions drove these shifts in voter choice requires further study. Lastly, we explore how a safety method can make LLMs more politically neutral, while leaving some open questions.

Designing LLM-Agents with Personalities: A Psychometric Approach

This research introduces a novel methodology for assigning quantifiable, controllable and psychometrically validated personalities to Large Language Models-Based Agents (Agents) using the Big Five personality framework. It seeks to overcome the constraints of human subject studies, proposing Agents as an accessible tool for social science inquiry. Through a series of four studies, this research demonstrates the feasibility of assigning psychometrically valid personality traits to Agents, enabling them to replicate complex human-like behaviors. The first study establishes an understanding of personality constructs and personality tests within the semantic space of an LLM. Two subsequent studies -- using empirical and simulated data -- illustrate the process of creating Agents and validate the results by showing strong correspondence between human and Agent answers to personality tests. The final study further corroborates this correspondence by using Agents to replicate known human correlations between personality traits and decision-making behaviors in scenarios involving risk-taking and ethical dilemmas, thereby validating the effectiveness of the psychometric approach to design Agents and its applicability to social and behavioral research.

Computational Life: How Well-formed, Self-replicating Programs Emerge from Simple Interaction

The fields of Origin of Life and Artificial Life both question what life is and how it emerges from a distinct set of "pre-life" dynamics. One common feature of most substrates where life emerges is a marked shift in dynamics when self-replication appears. While there are some hypotheses regarding how self-replicators arose in nature, we know very little about the general dynamics, computational principles, and necessary conditions for self-replicators to emerge. This is especially true on "computational substrates" where interactions involve logical, mathematical, or programming rules. In this paper we take a step towards understanding how self-replicators arise by studying several computational substrates based on various simple programming languages and machine instruction sets. We show that when random, non self-replicating programs are placed in an environment lacking any explicit fitness landscape, self-replicators tend to arise. We demonstrate how this occurs due to random interactions and self-modification, and can happen with and without background random mutations. We also show how increasingly complex dynamics continue to emerge following the rise of self-replicators. Finally, we show a counterexample of a minimalistic programming language where self-replicators are possible, but so far have not been observed to arise.

Evolving AI Collectives to Enhance Human Diversity and Enable Self-Regulation

Large language models steer their behaviors based on texts generated by others. This capacity and their increasing prevalence in online settings portend that they will intentionally or unintentionally "program" one another and form emergent AI subjectivities, relationships, and collectives. Here, we call upon the research community to investigate these "society-like" properties of interacting artificial intelligences to increase their rewards and reduce their risks for human society and the health of online environments. We use a simple model and its outputs to illustrate how such emergent, decentralized AI collectives can expand the bounds of human diversity and reduce the risk of toxic, anti-social behavior online. Finally, we discuss opportunities for AI self-moderation and address ethical issues and design challenges associated with creating and maintaining decentralized AI collectives.

The Future of Fundamental Science Led by Generative Closed-Loop Artificial Intelligence

Recent advances in machine learning and AI, including Generative AI and LLMs, are disrupting technological innovation, product development, and society as a whole. AI's contribution to technology can come from multiple approaches that require access to large training data sets and clear performance evaluation criteria, ranging from pattern recognition and classification to generative models. Yet, AI has contributed less to fundamental science in part because large data sets of high-quality data for scientific practice and model discovery are more difficult to access. Generative AI, in general, and Large Language Models in particular, may represent an opportunity to augment and accelerate the scientific discovery of fundamental deep science with quantitative models. Here we explore and investigate aspects of an AI-driven, automated, closed-loop approach to scientific discovery, including self-driven hypothesis generation and open-ended autonomous exploration of the hypothesis space. Integrating AI-driven automation into the practice of science would mitigate current problems, including the replication of findings, systematic production of data, and ultimately democratisation of the scientific process. Realising these possibilities requires a vision for augmented AI coupled with a diversity of AI approaches able to deal with fundamental aspects of causality analysis and model discovery while enabling unbiased search across the space of putative explanations. These advances hold the promise to unleash AI's potential for searching and discovering the fundamental structure of our world beyond what human scientists have been able to achieve. Such a vision would push the boundaries of new fundamental science rather than automatize current workflows and instead open doors for technological innovation to tackle some of the greatest challenges facing humanity today.

Accelerating science with human-aware artificial intelligence

Artificial intelligence (AI) models trained on published scientific findings have been used to invent valuable materials and targeted therapies, but they typically ignore the human scientists who continually alter the landscape of discovery. Here we show that incorporating the distribution of human expertise by training unsupervised models on simulated inferences cognitively accessible to experts dramatically improves (up to 400%) AI prediction of future discoveries beyond those focused on research content alone, especially when relevant literature is sparse. These models succeed by predicting human predictions and the scientists who will make them. By tuning human-aware AI to avoid the crowd, we can generate scientifically promising "alien" hypotheses unlikely to be imagined or pursued without intervention until the distant future, which hold promise to punctuate scientific advance beyond questions currently pursued. Accelerating human discovery or probing its blind spots, human-aware AI enables us to move toward and beyond the contemporary scientific frontier.

Complementary artificial intelligence designed to augment human discovery

Neither artificial intelligence designed to play Turing's imitation game, nor augmented intelligence built to maximize the human manipulation of information are tuned to accelerate innovation and improve humanity's collective advance against its greatest challenges. We reconceptualize and pilot beneficial AI to radically augment human understanding by complementing rather than competing with human cognitive capacity. Our approach to complementary intelligence builds on insights underlying the wisdom of crowds, which hinges on the independence and diversity of crowd members' information and approach. By programmatically incorporating information on the evolving distribution of scientific expertise from research papers, our approach follows the distribution of content in the literature while avoiding the scientific crowd and the hypotheses cognitively available to it. We use this approach to generate valuable predictions for what materials possess valuable energy-related properties (e.g., thermoelectricity), and what compounds possess valuable medical properties (e.g., asthma) that complement the human scientific crowd. We demonstrate that our complementary predictions, if identified by human scientists and inventors at all, are only discovered years further into the future. When we evaluate the promise of our predictions with first-principles equations, we demonstrate that increased complementarity of our predictions does not decrease and in some cases increases the probability that the predictions possess the targeted properties. In summary, by tuning AI to avoid the crowd, we can generate hypotheses unlikely to be imagined or pursued until the distant future and promise to punctuate scientific advance. By identifying and correcting for collective human bias, these models also suggest opportunities to improve human prediction by reformulating science education for discovery.

The Past as a Stochastic Process

Historical processes manifest remarkable diversity. Nevertheless, scholars have long attempted to identify patterns and categorize historical actors and influences with some success. A stochastic process framework provides a structured approach for the analysis of large historical datasets that allows for detection of sometimes surprising patterns, identification of relevant causal actors both endogenous and exogenous to the process, and comparison between different historical cases. The combination of data, analytical tools and the organizing theoretical framework of stochastic processes complements traditional narrative approaches in history and archaeology.