arXiv subjects

James Ravi Kirkpatrick

Publications and source records attributed to James Ravi Kirkpatrick.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Deepfakes at Face Value: Image and Authority

Deepfakes are synthetic media that superimpose or generate someone's likeness on to pre-existing sound, images, or videos using deep learning methods. Existing accounts of the wrongs involved in creating and distributing deepfakes focus on the harms they cause or the non-normative interests they violate. However, these approaches do not explain how deepfakes can be wrongful even when they cause no harm or set back any other non-normative interest. To address this issue, this paper identifies a neglected reason why deepfakes are wrong: they can subvert our legitimate interests in having authority over the permissible uses of our image and the governance of our identity. We argue that deepfakes are wrong when they usurp our authority to determine the provenance of our own agency by exploiting our biometric features as a generative resource. In particular, we have a specific right against the algorithmic conscription of our identity. We refine the scope of this interest by distinguishing between permissible forms of appropriation, such as artistic depiction, from wrongful algorithmic simulation.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Full-Stack Alignment: Co-Aligning AI and Institutions with Thick Models of Value

Beneficial societal outcomes cannot be guaranteed by aligning individual AI systems with the intentions of their operators or users. Even an AI system that is perfectly aligned to the intentions of its operating organization can lead to bad outcomes if the goals of that organization are misaligned with those of other institutions and individuals. For this reason, we need full-stack alignment, the concurrent alignment of AI systems and the institutions that shape them with what people value. This can be done without imposing a particular vision of individual or collective flourishing. We argue that current approaches for representing values, such as utility functions, preference orderings, or unstructured text, struggle to address these and other issues effectively. They struggle to distinguish values from other signals, to support principled normative reasoning, and to model collective goods. We propose thick models of value will be needed. These structure the way values and norms are represented, enabling systems to distinguish enduring values from fleeting preferences, to model the social embedding of individual choices, and to reason normatively, applying values in new domains. We demonstrate this approach in five areas: AI value stewardship, normatively competent agents, win-win negotiation systems, meaning-preserving economic mechanisms, and democratic regulatory institutions.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2025

Generics and Default Reasoning in Large Language Models

This paper evaluates the capabilities of 28 large language models (LLMs) to reason with 20 defeasible reasoning patterns involving generic generalizations (e.g., 'Birds fly', 'Ravens are black') central to non-monotonic logic. Generics are of special interest to linguists, philosophers, logicians, and cognitive scientists because of their complex exception-permitting behaviour and their centrality to default reasoning, cognition, and concept acquisition. We find that while several frontier models handle many default reasoning problems well, performance varies widely across models and prompting styles. Few-shot prompting modestly improves performance for some models, but chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting often leads to serious performance degradation (mean accuracy drop -11.14%, SD 15.74% in models performing above 75% accuracy in zero-shot condition, temperature 0). Most models either struggle to distinguish between defeasible and deductive inference or misinterpret generics as universal statements. These findings underscore both the promise and limits of current LLMs for default reasoning.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Conversational Alignment with Artificial Intelligence in Context

The development of sophisticated artificial intelligence (AI) conversational agents based on large language models raises important questions about the relationship between human norms, values, and practices and AI design and performance. This article explores what it means for AI agents to be conversationally aligned to human communicative norms and practices for handling context and common ground and proposes a new framework for evaluating developers' design choices. We begin by drawing on the philosophical and linguistic literature on conversational pragmatics to motivate a set of desiderata, which we call the CONTEXT-ALIGN framework, for conversational alignment with human communicative practices. We then suggest that current large language model (LLM) architectures, constraints, and affordances may impose fundamental limitations on achieving full conversational alignment.

cs.CY↗