Recursive Alignment: Supervision and Preference Preservation

Recursive alignment concerns what is preserved when one generation of AI systems supplies data, judgments, or methods for aligning the next. Two problems arise: supervision must remain reliable across capability gaps, and repeated training must retain the behaviors and preferences that supervision is intended to pro- tect. We examine these problems through recursive curation, pluralistic preference aggregation, decomposition and distillation, adversarial oversight, weak-to-strong transfer, recursive evaluators, and automated alignment research. Curation analyses show how reward improvement can coexist with concentration or unequal stakeholder influence, while pluralistic mechanisms can preserve competing preference regions under explicit conditions. Oversight experiments demonstrate improvements in assisted judgment and training, with guarantees dependent on representations, decompositions, and reliable evaluation. Across these approaches, local gains leave open whether their supporting conditions survive optimization and reuse. We compare the preserved properties, assumptions, and failure modes, and derive evaluation requirements for distributional coverage, stakeholder representation, and oversight across successor stages.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Published
2026-11-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.23873764
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
preprint
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
preprint

Recursive Alignment: Supervision and Preference Preservation

Li Yuxuan
1 links
Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
preprint

Recursive Alignment: Supervision and Preference Preservation

Li Yuxuan
preprint en

Abstract

Recursive alignment concerns what is preserved when one generation of AI systems supplies data, judgments, or methods for aligning the next. Two problems arise: supervision must remain reliable across capability gaps, and repeated training must retain the behaviors and preferences that supervision is intended to pro- tect. We examine these problems through recursive curation, pluralistic preference aggregation, decomposition and distillation, adversarial oversight, weak-to-strong transfer, recursive evaluators, and automated alignment research. Curation analyses show how reward improvement can coexist with concentration or unequal stakeholder influence, while pluralistic mechanisms can preserve competing preference regions under explicit conditions. Oversight experiments demonstrate improvements in assisted judgment and training, with guarantees dependent on representations, decompositions, and reliable evaluation. Across these approaches, local gains leave open whether their supporting conditions survive optimization and reuse. We compare the preserved properties, assumptions, and failure modes, and derive evaluation requirements for distributional coverage, stakeholder representation, and oversight across successor stages.

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon
Recursive Alignment: Supervision and Preference Preservation — Li Yuxuan · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS