Skip to content
← Back to explorer

Position: General Alignment Has Hit a Ceiling; Edge Alignment Must Be Taken Seriously

Han Bao, Yue Huang, Xiaoda Wang, Zheyuan Zhang, Yujun Zhou, Carl Yang, Xiangliang Zhang, Yanfang Ye · Feb 23, 2026 · Citations: 0

Abstract

Large language models are being deployed in complex socio-technical systems, which exposes limits in current alignment practice. We take the position that the dominant paradigm of General Alignment, which compresses diverse human values into a single scalar reward, reaches a structural ceiling in settings with conflicting values, plural stakeholders, and irreducible uncertainty. These failures follow from the mathematics and incentives of scalarization and lead to \textbf{structural} value flattening, \textbf{normative} representation loss, and \textbf{cognitive} uncertainty blindness. We introduce Edge Alignment as a distinct approach in which systems preserve multi dimensional value structure, support plural and democratic representation, and incorporate epistemic mechanisms for interaction and clarification. To make this approach practical, we propose seven interdependent pillars organized into three phases. We identify key challenges in data collection, training objectives, and evaluation, outlining complementary technical and governance directions. Taken together, these measures reframe alignment as a lifecycle problem of dynamic normative governance rather than as a single instance optimization task.

Human Data Lens

  • Uses human feedback: No
  • Feedback types: None
  • Rater population: Unknown
  • Unit of annotation: Scalar
  • Expertise required: Math

Evaluation Lens

  • Evaluation modes: Automatic Metrics
  • Agentic eval: None
  • Quality controls: Not reported
  • Confidence: 0.30
  • Flags: low_signal, possible_false_positive

Research Summary

Contribution Summary

  • Large language models are being deployed in complex socio-technical systems, which exposes limits in current alignment practice.
  • We take the position that the dominant paradigm of General Alignment, which compresses diverse human values into a single scalar reward, reaches a structural ceiling in settings with conflicting values, plural stakeholders, and irreducible
  • These failures follow from the mathematics and incentives of scalarization and lead to \textbf{structural} value flattening, \textbf{normative} representation loss, and \textbf{cognitive} uncertainty blindness.

Why It Matters For Eval

  • We take the position that the dominant paradigm of General Alignment, which compresses diverse human values into a single scalar reward, reaches a structural ceiling in settings with conflicting values, plural stakeholders, and irreducible
  • We identify key challenges in data collection, training objectives, and evaluation, outlining complementary technical and governance directions.

Related Papers