Multi-Stakeholder LLM Alignment: Decomposing Estimation from Aggregation

Multi-stakeholder tasks require one output to satisfy users with conflicting preferences. Holistic LLM judges conflate utility estimation and utility aggregation, yielding unstable implicit weights. We show empirically and theoretically that this aggregation-specific \emph{weighting noise} can create large score shifts when stakeholder satisfaction is dispersed; in our experiments, these weight-induced shifts also increase with stakeholder count. We propose $\text{textsc}DecompR$: counterfactual-calibrated weights are fixed from query structure before candidate scoring, while per-role utilities are estimated independently, removing candidate-dependent weight drift and reducing estimation noise.