Thesis Proposal: Toward a Human-Centered and Perspective-Aware Framework for Reproducible ML Evaluation and AI Alignment

arXiv:2608.30842v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Humans play a vital role at every stage of AI development, from data collection and curation to model development and evaluation. However, humans often disagree with each other and sometimes with themselves over time. It is essential to take disagreement into account when building human-centered AI systems, especially in domains where it is prevalent, such as AI safety, content moderation, or sentiment analysis. Disagreement often arises from subjective human opinion and can vary with one's identity, beliefs, and social environment. Despite this, current LLM evaluation approaches frequently rely on aggregating labels (often via plurality voting) to represent consensus, thereby obscuring minority perspectives. By failing to account for human disagreement, these evaluation methods contribute to the reproducibility crisis in AI. Human feedback is also crucial for ensuring that AI systems align with human values. For these systems to be trustworthy, it is critical to ensure that they reflect diverse human values and perspectives. In this thesis proposal, we present a human-centered and perspective-aware framework for reproducible ML evaluation and AI alignment.

Related

• Toward Cultural Alignment: Human-Centered Evaluation of Multimodal AI Stories Across Five African Communities
• Averaging Bias: Human Faithfulness Annotations are not Locally Faithful
• Alignment Data Map for Efficient Preference Data Selection and Diagnosis
• Judge Like Human Examiners: A Weighted Importance Multi-Point Evaluation Framework for Generative Tasks with Long-form Answers

Source: arXiv cs.CL | 2026-09-01