theseus: extract from 2025-11-00-operationalizing-pluralistic-values-llm-alignment.md

- Source: inbox/archive/2025-11-00-operationalizing-pluralistic-values-llm-alignment.md
- Domain: ai-alignment
- Extracted by: headless extraction cron (worker 5)

Pentagon-Agent: Theseus <HEADLESS>

inbox/archive/2025-11-00-operationalizing-pluralistic-values-llm-alignment.md

@@ -7,9 +7,14 @@ date: 2025-11-01
 domain: ai-alignment
 secondary_domains: []
 format: paper
-status: unprocessed
+status: null-result
 priority: high
 tags: [pluralistic-alignment, demographic-composition, empirical, safety-inclusivity, real-human-feedback]
+processed_by: theseus
+processed_date: 2026-03-11
+enrichments_applied: ["community-centred norm elicitation surfaces alignment targets materially different from developer-specified rules.md", "pluralistic alignment must accommodate irreducibly diverse values simultaneously rather than converging on a single aligned state.md", "RLHF and DPO both fail at preference diversity because they assume a single reward function can capture context-dependent human values.md"]
+extraction_model: "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5"
+extraction_notes: "First large-scale empirical study quantifying demographic composition effects on alignment outcomes. Single new claim extracted with high confidence (likely) due to large N and systematic design. Three enrichments to existing pluralistic alignment claims. Full paper access would enable extraction of interaction effects and comparison with PAL/MixDPO approaches."
 ---
 
 ## Content
@@ -37,3 +42,11 @@ Demonstrates that "whose feedback" matters as much as "how much feedback" for al
 PRIMARY CONNECTION: community-centred norm elicitation surfaces alignment targets materially different from developer-specified rules
 WHY ARCHIVED: Empirical evidence that "whose preferences" is a quantitatively important question, not just a fairness concern
 EXTRACTION HINT: Focus on the magnitude of demographic composition effects and what this means for single-population alignment training
+
+
+## Key Facts
+- Study included 1,095 participants providing 27,375 ratings
+- Liberal feedback models: +5.0 pp vs Conservative baseline
+- White feedback models: +4.7 pp vs Black baseline
+- Female feedback models: +3.4 pp vs Male baseline
+- Effects measured on emotional awareness and toxicity dimensions