Loading
Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · November 4, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Preprint.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Current generative AI alignment relies on a myopic paradigm that prioritizes immediate conversational satisfaction. By relying on short-horizon feedback, this approach ignores the profound, longitudinal externalities of persistent human-AI interaction, which can lead to adverse outcomes such as cognitive atrophy, social erosion, and diminished human agency. To address this, we propose a paradigm shift toward long-horizon alignment that accounts for how AI reshapes human experience over time. To this end, we map the tensions between near-term utility and long-term costs of AI use across four facets of human well-being to reveal outcomes that current reward models fail to capture. Ultimately, we advocate for moving beyond simple preference optimization toward alignment strategies that actively foster long-term human well-being by navigating these complex temporal scales.