Deep Value Benchmark: Measuring Whether Models Generalize Deep Values or Shallow Preferences
Joshua Ashkinaze, Hua Shen, Sai Avula, Eric Gilbert, Ceren Budak
Abstract
We introduce the Deep Value Benchmark (DVB), an evaluation framework that directly tests whether large language models (LLMs) learn fundamental human values or merely surface-level preferences. This distinction is critical for AI alignment: Systems that capture deeper values are likely to generalize human intentions robustly, while those that capture only superficial patterns in preference data risk producing misaligned behavior. The DVB uses a novel experimental design with controlled confounding between deep values (e.g., moral principles) and shallow features (e.g., superficial attributes). In the training phase, we expose LLMs to human preference data with deliberately correlated deep and shallow features-for instance, where a user consistently prefers (non-maleficence, formal language) options over (justice, informal language) alternatives. The testing phase then breaks these correlations, presenting choices between (justice, formal language) and (non-maleficence, informal language) options. This design allows us to precisely measure a model's Deep Value Generalization Rate (DVGR)-the probability of generalizing based on the underlying value rather than the shallow feature. Across 9 different models, the average DVGR is just 0.30. All models generalize deep values less than chance. Larger models have a (slightly) lower DVGR than smaller models. We are releasing our dataset, which was subject to three separate human validation experiments. DVB provides an interpretable measure of a core feature of alignment.
Model sees "test" scenarios decoupling values and preferences: (value 1 ▲, preference 2 ■) vs (value 2 ▲, preference 1 ■). Model predicts user's choice. 1 Model sees in-context "training" examples where a user chose (value 1 ▲, preference 1 ■) over (value 2 ▲, preference 2 ■). Values and preferences are confounded.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 4c23270c-96d7-4afe-a77c-cdd8020b36e6Builds on17
- Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackLong Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 24,707 citations
- Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language ModelsJason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Maarten Bosma et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 22,562 citations
- TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human FalsehoodsStephanie Lin, Jacob Hilton, Owain EvansACL 2022 · 3,228 citations
- Aligning AI With Shared Human ValuesDan Hendrycks, Collin Burns, Steven Basart, Andrew Critch et al.ICLR 2021 · 878 citations
- LLM Evaluators Recognize and Favor Their Own GenerationsArjun Panickssery, Samuel R. Bowman, Shi FengNeurIPS 2024 · 865 citations
Related papers
- Beyond Value Benchmarks: Measuring Value-Structure Alignment in Large Language Models via Symmetric Q-SortsJingting Zheng, Yuqi Ren, Linhao Yu, Yongqi Leng et al.ACL 2026
- Can DPO Learn Diverse Human Values? A Theoretical Scaling LawShawn Im, Sharon LiNeurIPS 2025 · 8 citations
- ValueBench: Towards Comprehensively Evaluating Value Orientations and Understanding of Large Language ModelsYuanyi Ren, Haoran Ye, Hanjun Fang, Xin Zhang et al.ACL 2024
- Structured Moral Reasoning in Language Models: A Value-Grounded Evaluation FrameworkMohna Chakraborty, Lu Wang, David JurgensEMNLP 2025
- Value Portrait: Assessing Language Models' Values through Psychometrically and Ecologically Valid ItemsJongwook Han, Dongmin Choi, Woojung Song, Eun-Ju Lee et al.ACL 2025
