arXiv subjects

Jaymari Chua

Publications and source records attributed to Jaymari Chua.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Runtime Action Interference for AI Control of AlphaStar in StarCraft II

A trained reinforcement learning policy does not determine the complete behavior that users encounter: deployment code still schedules, admits, suppresses, or replaces its proposed actions. We contribute \emph{runtime action interference} (RAI), an AI control mechanism that preserves policy parameters while regulating action pacing and filtering configured action patterns after inference. RAI releases a proposed action only when its cooldown condition is satisfied and its content detector does not flag the action; otherwise, it dispatches a no-op. The detector covers specified toxic behaviors, including worker-unit harassment, while the cooldown controls action rate. We implement RAI in a replication of AlphaStar actor.py and make the implementation and reproducibility materials available through an open source code repository. We deployed RAI in a \textit{StarCraft~II} human participant study that compared two presentations of the same opponent with high capability and rate limited actions; we withheld its capability claim in one presentation and disclosed it in the other. On response scales from 1 to 5, we observed pooled fairness, trust, and toxicity means of 3.90, 3.50, and 2.00 under claim withholding, compared with 2.62, 4.31, and 2.85 under disclosure. Disclosure corresponded with lower perceived fairness and higher perceived toxicity across every expertise group, whereas trust increased among novices and experts but decreased among intermediate participants. Our human evaluation therefore shows that perceptions of an opponent controlled through RAI can vary substantially with the capability information presented to users, even when the configured control remains constant. We conclude that human-computer evaluations must separate control within the execution stack from capability disclosure and assess fairness, trust, and toxicity as distinct dimensions of human experience.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

Three-Body Alignment: Aligning Chess Agent with Human Reasoning through Reranked Rationale

As reasoning agents become increasingly complex, aligning their underlying reasoning and decision-making processes with human conceptual models is a challenge for AI security and safety. When modelling expert knowledge, understanding how to characterise and integrate insights from agents with fundamentally different reasoning architectures is necessary for safe and predictable deployment. We investigate this alignment through a \emph{three-body alignment} in chess, analysing the semantic divergence between rationales produced by human experts (Grandmasters), engine-assisted human commentators (who rationalise the outputs of efficiently updatable neural networks, or NNUEs), and Large Language Models (LLMs). Our contributions include: (1) A novel multisource rationale dataset, constructed using an agentic data engineering pipeline to transform unstructured expert commentary into structured, queryable data for alignment evaluation. (2) An empirical analysis of the semantic embedding space. Using t-SNE visualisation, we demonstrate that these sources form distinct clusters, confirming significant heterogeneity and reflecting fundamentally different conceptual approaches to the same environment. (3) An experiment demonstrating that reranking mechanisms can improve human alignment, while quantifying the explicit trade-off with tactical performance, offering a pathway for more interpretable agent decision-making. (4) The preliminary development of an enriched chess narrative dataset structure, designed to lay the groundwork for future evaluations of text rationale similarity and to address the limitations of standard dense retrieval. (5) Finally, we open-source our chess rationales dataset\footnote{Hugging Face: https://huggingface.co/datasets/jaymarichua/trichess} to support developing novel techniques that integrate diverse expert knowledge into human-aligned intelligent agents.

cs.GT↗

arXiv2026

Situation Perception: A Necessary Primitive to Artificial Superintelligence

Current large language models are extraordinary statistical engines. They compress vast amounts of text into useful patterns and can explain science, write code, imitate reasoning, and participate in philosophical conversation. Yet pattern mastery is not the same as general intelligence. A human infant begins with little explicit knowledge, but gradually discovers object permanence, cause and effect, other minds, bodily agency, and the persistence of the physical world. We make an argument that the path to artificial superintelligence (ASI) depends on a missing capacity we call \emph{situation perception}: the ability to construct, revise, and act within internal simulations of possible worlds across latent time. \emph{ perception} requires at least three core components: abstract prediction, long-term compressed memory, and active learning guided by objectives. In this work, we analyse why modern large language models remain incomplete, and propose the appropriate tests for measuring progress and consequences of machines that can simulate futures, pursue self-directed goals, and possibly judge their own creators.

cs.CY↗

arXiv2025

Superhuman Game AI Disclosure: Expertise and Context Moderate Effects on Trust and Fairness

As artificial intelligence surpasses human performance in select tasks, disclosing superhuman capabilities poses distinct challenges for fairness, accountability, and trust. However, the impact of such disclosures on diverse user attitudes and behaviors remains unclear, particularly concerning potential negative reactions like discouragement or overreliance. This paper investigates these effects by utilizing Persona Cards: a validated, standardized set of synthetic personas designed to simulate diverse user reactions and fairness perspectives. We conducted an ethics board-approved study (N=32), utilizing these personas to investigate how capability disclosure influenced behaviors with a superhuman game AI in competitive StarCraft II scenarios. Our results reveal transparency is double-edged: while disclosure could alleviate suspicion, it also provoked frustration and strategic defeatism among novices in cooperative scenarios, as well as overreliance in competitive contexts. Experienced and competitive players interpreted disclosure as confirmation of an unbeatable opponent, shifting to suboptimal goals. We release the Persona Cards Dataset, including profiles, prompts, interaction logs, and protocols, to foster reproducible research into human alignment AI design. This work demonstrates that transparency is not a cure-all; successfully leveraging disclosure to enhance trust and accountability requires careful tailoring to user characteristics, domain norms, and specific fairness objectives.

cs.HC↗

arXiv2025

Learning Natural Language Constraints for Safe Reinforcement Learning of Language Agents

Generalizable alignment is a core challenge for deploying Large Language Models (LLMs) safely in real-world NLP applications. Current alignment methods, including Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF), often fail to guarantee constraint satisfaction outside their training distribution due to their reliance on implicit, post-hoc preferences. Inspired by a paradigm shift to first curate data before tuning, we introduce a new framework for safe language alignment that learns natural language constraints from positive and negative demonstrations as a primary step. From inferring both a task-specific reward function and latent constraint functions, our approach fosters adaptation to novel safety requirements and robust generalization under domain shifts and adversarial inputs. We formalize the framework within a Constrained Markov Decision Process (CMDP) and validate it via a text-based navigation environment, demonstrating safe adaptation to changing danger zones. Our experiments show fewer violations upon domain shift when following a safe navigation path, and we achieve zero violations by applying learned constraints to a distilled BERT model as a fine-tuning technique. This work offers a promising path toward building safety-critical and more generalizable LLMs for practical NLP settings.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2024

AI Safety in Generative AI Large Language Models: A Survey

Large Language Model (LLMs) such as ChatGPT that exhibit generative AI capabilities are facing accelerated adoption and innovation. The increased presence of Generative AI (GAI) inevitably raises concerns about the risks and safety associated with these models. This article provides an up-to-date survey of recent trends in AI safety research of GAI-LLMs from a computer scientist's perspective: specific and technical. In this survey, we explore the background and motivation for the identified harms and risks in the context of LLMs being generative language models; our survey differentiates by emphasising the need for unified theories of the distinct safety challenges in the research development and applications of LLMs. We start our discussion with a concise introduction to the workings of LLMs, supported by relevant literature. Then we discuss earlier research that has pointed out the fundamental constraints of generative models, or lack of understanding thereof (e.g., performance and safety trade-offs as LLMs scale in number of parameters). We provide a sufficient coverage of LLM alignment -- delving into various approaches, contending methods and present challenges associated with aligning LLMs with human preferences. By highlighting the gaps in the literature and possible implementation oversights, our aim is to create a comprehensive analysis that provides insights for addressing AI safety in LLMs and encourages the development of aligned and secure models. We conclude our survey by discussing future directions of LLMs for AI safety, offering insights into ongoing research in this critical area.

cs.CY↗