Whose Alignment? Comparing LLM Process Alignment Across Diverse Organizational Decision Contexts
The paper discusses the alignment of AI systems with organizational decision-making, emphasizing the complexity of this challenge. It introduces a method for measuring process alignment, which assesses how well an AI model weights information compared to an organization. The findings reveal that high process alignment is not always achievable or desirable, particularly in contested domains.
- ▪The study critiques the common framing of AI alignment as a single-target problem.
- ▪A decision-policy capturing method was used to measure process alignment in AI models.
- ▪Results showed that process alignment strongly predicts output accuracy in some contexts but not in others.
arXiv cs.AI files mainly under ai research. We currently carry 1,128 of its stories.
Story provenance
Source · retrieval · rights · ranking — open for full record
inspect →
Attribution is not the same as permission. This drawer separates discovery metadata, excerpts, WeSearch-generated summaries, reuse status, and whether the publisher receives the visit. Nothing here claims a legal grant the publisher has not made.
Record
| Original publisher | arXiv cs.AI |
| Canonical URL | https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.25256 |
| Publication time | Tue, 26 May 2026 00:00:00 -0400 |
| Retrieval time | 2026-05-26T04:07:43.013Z |
| Last seen | 2026-05-26T04:07:43.013Z |
| Headline source | Publisher (no WeSearch rewrite) |
| Excerpt source | publisher body |
| Excerpt method | First ~120 words (~800 chars) of extracted publisher body, fair-use limited. |
| Summary | WeSearch · cerebras-chat (WeSearch summarizer) |
| Summary source text | contentText |
| Citation coverage | Summary is a WeSearch-generated derivative; primary citation is the original publisher URL. |
| Cluster | Z7wb3FbkIPPZ |
| Cluster logic | Grouped by semantic title/content similarity across sources within a rolling window. Same-publisher template collisions are excluded from coverage comparison. |
| Ranking reason | Story pages are not engagement-ranked. Hub feeds use recency, with optional source-diversified chronological ordering (cap consecutive stories per source). No personalized ranking. |
| Publisher visit | Yes — open original |
| Substitutes article? | No — link-out required for full text |
Rights status (four layers)
WeSearch handling by dimension
| Indexing | May the item be indexed (stored, ranked, made findable)? | Allowed |
| Snippet | May a short excerpt of the publisher's text be shown? | Allowed |
| AI summary | May WeSearch generate its own short summary of the article? | Limited |
| Retrieval / RAG | May the content be exposed for third-party retrieval-augmented generation? | Not asserted |
| Model training | May the content be used to train AI models? | Not asserted |
| Commercial reuse | May the content be reused commercially? | Not permitted |
Basis: Derived from the published RSS/Atom feed. Contact: [email protected]. Reviewed: 2026-07-24.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence arXiv:2605.25256 (cs) [Submitted on 24 May 2026] Title:Whose Alignment? Comparing LLM Process Alignment Across Diverse Organizational Decision Contexts Authors:Niklas Weller, Emilio Barkett View a PDF of the paper titled Whose Alignment? Comparing LLM Process Alignment Across Diverse Organizational Decision Contexts, by Niklas Weller and 1 other authors View PDF HTML (experimental) Abstract:Aligning AI systems with organizational decision-making is typically framed as a single-target problem: make the model behave like the organization. We argue this framing obscures a deeper pluralistic challenge.
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at arXiv cs.AI.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from arXiv cs.AI
