arXiv AI
ProMoral-Bench: Evaluating Prompting Strategies for Moral Reasoning and Safety in LLMs
Read the original on arXiv AI →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv AI.
Related stories
arXiv Computation and Language
Oct 15
Moral Combat: Exploiting Moral Foundations Theory to Jailbreak LLMs
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.
arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 5
Moral Sensitivity in LLMs: A Tiered Evaluation of Contextual Bias via Behavioral Profiling and Mechanistic Interpretability
arXiv:2605. 03217v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in settings that require nuanced ethical reasoning, yet existing bias evaluations treat model outputs as simply "biased" or "unbiased.
arXiv AI
Sep 1
TPvG: A Moral Decision Framework for Large Language Models from One-Shot to Sequential Feedback
arXiv:2608.28610v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Existing LLM moral evaluations typically present models with isolated moral vignettes and elicit a single-shot decision, neglecting a factor known to p...
arXiv AI
Sep 2
Validity-Aware Jailbreak Evaluation for Large Language Models
The paper introduces SEAV, a verification‑centric framework for evaluating jailbreak attempts against large language models. SEAV decomposes responses into ordered steps and checks both validity and correctness using LLM‑as‑a‑judge and retrieval‑grounded verification. The method reduces false positives by 14.9 percentage points on a strategic‑dishonesty diagnostic and reclassifies 22.1–51.0% of previously successful jailbreaks as invalid across multiple benchmarks.
arXiv AI
Sep 4
Representational alignment yields generalizable safety in language models
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.
arXiv Computation and Language
Oct 27
The Straight and Narrow: Do LLMs Possess an Internal Moral Path?
arXiv:2601.10307v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Enhancing the moral alignment of Large Language Models (LLMs) is a critical challenge in AI safety. Current alignment techniques often act as super...