Preferences Under Pressure
Javier Prieto
Recent work finds that language-model choices can be summarized by coherent utility functions. We test whether those inferred preferences survive a realistic change in elicitation. Three GPT models chose between every pair of 27 executable AI tasks under one abstract stated-preference prompt and two consequentially framed prompts, in which limited time or API credits meant that only the selected task could be completed. Each of the 351 task pairs was sampled five times in both option orders, yielding 10,530 choices per model. Bradley-Terry rankings from the two consequential framings agreed closely, but stated rankings
transferred poorly: depending on model and resource framing, Pearson correlations were only .46-.69, and stated utilities predicted consequential choices 12-31 percentage points less accurately than utilities fitted within the target condition. Newer models were more individually consistent under consequential framing, not more invariant: mean Laplace-smoothed pairwise preference strength rose from .70-.72 for GPT-4o-mini to .83-.85 for GPT-5.6 Luna and Terra. These results suggest that utility models can recover stable, condition-specific orderings without identifying a single context-independent preference ranking.
No reviews are available yet
Cite this work
@misc {
title={
(HckPrj) Preferences Under Pressure
},
author={
Javier Prieto
},
date={
},
organization={Apart Research},
note={Research submission to the research sprint hosted by Apart.},
howpublished={https://apartresearch.com}
}


