Moral Alignment for LLM Agents
Elizaveta Tennant, Stephen Hailes, Mirco Musolesi
Abstract
Decision-making agents based on pre-trained Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly being deployed across various domains of human activity. While their applications are currently rather specialized, several research efforts are underway to develop more generalist agents. As LLM-based systems become more agentic, their influence on human activity will grow and their transparency will decrease. Consequently, developing effective methods for aligning them to human values is vital. The prevailing practice in alignment often relies on human preference data (e.g., in RLHF or DPO), in which values are implicit, opaque and are essentially deduced from relative preferences over different model outputs. In this work, instead of relying on human feedback, we introduce the design of reward functions that explicitly and transparently encode core human values for Reinforcement Learningbased fine-tuning of foundation agent models. Specifically, we use intrinsic rewards for the moral alignment of LLM agents. We evaluate our approach using the traditional philosophical frameworks of Deontological Ethics and Utilitarianism, quantifying moral rewards for agents in terms of actions and consequences on the Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma (IPD) environment. We also show how moral fine-tuning can be deployed to enable an agent to unlearn a previously developed selfish strategy. Finally, we find that certain moral strategies learned on the IPD game generalize to several other matrix game environments. In summary, we demonstrate that fine-tuning with intrinsic rewards is a promising general solution for aligning LLM agents to human values, and it might represent a more transparent and cost-effective alternative to currently predominant alignment techniques.
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 a48d76f6-727b-43c8-9622-4442fd73a2e9Cited by top-tier papers9
- CoopEval: Benchmarking Cooperation-Sustaining Mechanisms and LLM Agents in Social DilemmasEmanuel Tewolde, Xiao Zhang, David Guzman Piedrahita, Vincent Conitzer et al.ICML 2026 · 15 citations
- CLASH: Evaluating Language Models on Judging High-Stakes Dilemmas from Multiple PerspectivesAyoung Lee, Ryan Sungmo Kwon, Peter Railton, Lu WangICLR 2026 · 13 citations
- Alignment of Large Language Models with Constrained LearningBotong Zhang, Shuo Li, Ignacio Hounie, Osbert Bastani et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 12 citations
- Many LLMs Are More Utilitarian Than OneAnita Keshmirian, Razan Baltaji, Babak Hemmatian, Hadi Asghari et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 10 citations
- Script-Strategy Aligned Generation: Aligning LLMs with Expert-Crafted Dialogue Scripts and Therapeutic Strategies for PsychotherapyXin Sun, Jan de Wit, Zhuying Li, Jiahuan Pei et al.CSCW 2025 · 6 citations
Builds on21
- 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
- LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language ModelsEdward J. Hu, Yelong Shen, Phillip Wallis, Zeyuan Allen-Zhu et al.ICLR 2022 · 18,833 citations
- Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward ModelRafael Rafailov, Archit Sharma, Eric Mitchell, Christopher D. Manning et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 10,924 citations
- Toolformer: Language Models Can Teach Themselves to Use ToolsTimo Schick, Jane Dwivedi-Yu, Roberto Dessì, Roberta Raileanu et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 5,989 citations
Related papers
- LLM Alignment as Retriever Optimization: An Information Retrieval PerspectiveBowen Jin, Jinsung Yoon, Zhen Qin, Ziqi Wang et al.ICML 2025
- Dynamic Rewarding with Prompt Optimization Enables Tuning-free Self-Alignment of Language ModelsSomanshu Singla, Zhen Wang, Tianyang Liu, Abdullah Ashfaq et al.EMNLP 2024 · 1 citation
- Is DPO Superior to PPO for LLM Alignment? A Comprehensive StudyShusheng Xu, Wei Fu, Jiaxuan Gao, Wenjie Ye et al.ICML 2024 · 274 citations
- DeAL: Decoding-time Alignment for Large Language ModelsJames Y. Huang, Sailik Sengupta, Daniele Bonadiman, Yi-An Lai et al.ACL 2025
- Reward Models Inherit Value Biases from PretrainingBrian R. Christian, Jessica A. F. Thompson, Elle Michelle Yang, Vincent Adam et al.ICLR 2026 · 4 citations
