The study investigates how large language models encode moral knowledge by training linear probes for each category of Moral Foundations Theory. It finds that the model’s representations for different moral foundations occupy distinct, largely independent dimensions yet share a common positive component, indicating an integrated but nuanced moral structure. This geometry is consistent across model architectures and scales, emerges early in pre‑training, and reflects corpus statistics rather than the individualizing/binding distinction of the theory.
By Orion Reblitz-Richardson
The paper investigates how large language models encode moral knowledge by training linear probes for each Moral Foundations Theory category and analyzing their geometric relationships. It finds that the model’s moral directions are largely independent yet share a common component, indicating integration rather than collapse into a single detector. This structure is consistent across architectures, emerges early in pre‑training, and reflects corpus statistics rather than the individualizing/binding distinction of Moral Foundations Theory.
The paper argues that aligning large language models (LLMs) at the level of latent representations—specifically by matching their internal categorization of moral concepts to human prototype-based judgments—improves safety. Current alignment methods that focus on observable responses fail to preserve fine-grained moral categorization, leaving models vulnerable to adversarial rephrasings. By optimizing representational similarity, the authors demonstrate that LLMs can maintain more robust moral categorization and exhibit better adversarial robustness across multiple benchmarks and model sizes.
By Lingyu Li, Yan Teng, Yingchun Wang, Xia Hu
arXiv:2603.16017v2 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) increasingly participate in morally sensitive decision-making, yet how they organize ethical frameworks across r...
By Fan Huang, Haewoon Kwak, Jisun An
The paper introduces COMETH, a framework that learns interpretable moral contexts from human judgments using probabilistic clustering and large language models. It builds a dataset of 300 scenarios involving six core actions and three moral rules, and employs an LLM-based preprocessing pipeline to cluster actions and scenarios. COMETH achieves roughly double the alignment with human judgments compared to end‑to‑end LLM prompting, while providing transparent explanations of the contextual features driving its predictions.
By Geoffroy Morlat, Marceau Nahon, Augustin Chartouny, Raja Chatila, Ismael T. Freire, Mehdi Khamassi
The paper introduces WSF-ARG+, a new dataset that pairs hate speech with check‑worthiness annotations, and presents an LLM‑in‑the‑loop framework to streamline the annotation process. Experiments with 12 open‑weight large language models demonstrate that the framework cuts human effort while maintaining annotation quality. The study also shows that incorporating check‑worthiness labels improves hate‑speech detection performance, boosting macro‑F1 scores for large models by up to 0.213 and averaging 0.154 across models.
By Nicol\'as Benjam\'in Ocampo, Tommaso Caselli, Davide Ceolin
arXiv:2610.12445v2 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: Recent incidents have highlighted the challenge of monitoring LLM agents and the danger of models deceiving people. We show that white-box de...
By Oskar J. Hollinsworth, Alex F. Spies, Tigist Diriba, Adam Gleave, Chris Cundy
The paper presents a white‑box deception detection system that uses probes trained on the largest deception dataset (FIBS) and a novel architecture aggregating across layers and tokens. The probes achieve 98.8% AUC on SHADE‑Arena, outperforming a text‑monitoring baseline, and reach up to 99.7% AUC when detecting introspective deception that cannot be inferred from context alone. They also effectively detect deception in open‑weight models on politically sensitive topics and when models are pressured about their beliefs.
By Oskar J. Hollinsworth, Alex F. Spies, Tigist Diriba, Adam Gleave, Chris Cundy
The paper "Moral Combat: Exploiting Moral Foundations Theory to Jailbreak LLMs" presents a multi‑agent framework that uses Moral Foundations Theory to reframe harmful prompts in a way that aligns with different moral foundations, thereby enabling large language models to bypass safety guardrails. The authors demonstrate that this approach achieves high single‑trial jailbreak rates across several open‑source and proprietary models, with success increasing under repeated attempts. Their analysis also reveals that existing safety benchmarks are unevenly distributed across moral foundations, focusing on those foundations where models already show biases.
By Adel Khorramrouz, Yi-Chia Wang, Sharon Levy
The paper presents an explainable hate‑speech detection framework that combines DistilBERT embeddings, a Bi‑LSTM network, and an attention mechanism to capture contextual and sequential information. It uses LIME to highlight influential text features, providing transparency in predictions. Evaluated on two benchmark datasets for both binary and multi‑class tasks, the model achieves F1‑scores of 96.78%–99.53% for binary classification and 94.99%–97.00% for multi‑class classification, outperforming existing baselines.
By Rameesha Zia, Muhammad Shahid Iqbal Malik
arXiv:2608.23264v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Although Large Language Models (LLMs) are aligned to optimize for both helpfulness and harmlessness, these dual objectives may conflict, inevitably lea...
By Or Biton, Tomer Krichli, Itai Allouche, Joseph Keshet
The paper introduces FAID, a fine‑grained adaptive framework for detecting implicit hate speech. It first classifies samples into Shallow, Targeted, or Context‑Dependent categories and then applies tailored strategies—prompt‑tuning for shallow cases, knowledge augmentation for targeted ones, and an agentic prompt‑generation system for context‑dependent posts. Experiments on four benchmark datasets show that FAID outperforms state‑of‑the‑art baselines by allocating computational effort only where needed.
By Han Wang, Yuhu Cheng, Xuesong Wang, Yi Zhu