mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

MFTCXplain: A Multilingual Benchmark Dataset for Evaluating the Moral Reasoning of LLMs through Multi-hop Hate Speech Explanation

arXiv 2506.19073 ↗First posted 23 Jun 2025cs.CLcited by 8

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation

Abstract (arXiv)

Ensuring the moral reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) is a growing concern as these systems are used in socially sensitive tasks. Nevertheless, current evaluation benchmarks present two major shortcomings: a lack of annotations that justify moral classifications, which limits transparency and interpretability; and a predominant focus on English, which constrains the assessment of moral reasoning across diverse cultural settings. In this paper, we introduce MFTCXplain, a multilingual benchmark dataset for evaluating the moral reasoning of LLMs via multi-hop hate speech explanation using the Moral Foundations Theory. MFTCXplain comprises 3,000 tweets across Portuguese, Italian, Persian, and English, annotated with binary hate speech labels, moral categories, and text span-level rationales. Our results show a misalignment between LLM outputs and human annotations in moral reasoning tasks. While LLMs perform well in hate speech detection (F1 up to 0.836), their ability to predict moral sentiments is notably weak (F1 < 0.35). Furthermore, rationale alignment remains limited mainly in underrepresented languages. Our findings show the limited capacity of current LLMs to internalize and reflect human moral reasoning

Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 12 of its 95 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 23 Jun 2025.

Builds on

12 of 95 references.

Closest ancestors · 2

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025Enhancing Large Language Models with Neurosymbolic Reasoning for Multilingual Tasks3 Jun
  2. 2023Rethinking Machine Ethics -- Can LLMs Perform Moral Reasoning through the Lens of Moral Theories?29 Aug

Other references · 10

  1. 2019ERASER: A Benchmark to Evaluate Rationalized NLP Modelscited by 530
  2. 2024Replacing Judges with Juries: Evaluating LLM Generations with a Panel of Diverse Modelscited by 326
  3. 2019Predicting the Type and Target of Offensive Posts in Social Mediacited by 271
  4. 2021On Releasing Annotator-Level Labels and Information in Datasetscited by 126
  5. 2023Moral Foundations of Large Language Modelscited by 85
  6. 2025Values in the Wild: Discovering and Analyzing Values in Real-World Language Model Interactionscited by 52
  7. 2021Hate Towards the Political Opponent: A Twitter Corpus Study of the 2020 US Elections on the Basis of Offensive Speech and Stance Detectioncited by 45
  8. 2022The Moral Foundations Reddit Corpuscited by 21
  9. 2025Mind the Language Gap: Automated and Augmented Evaluation of Bias in LLMs for High- and Low-Resource Languagescited by 4
  10. 2024DADIT: A Dataset for Demographic Classification of Italian Twitter Users and a Comparison of Prediction Methodscited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 8.

8 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2023Probing LLMs for hate speech detection: strengths and vulnerabilities
  2. 2025Rethinking Hate Speech Detection on Social Media: Can LLMs Replace Traditional Models?
  3. 2026X-MuTeST: A Multilingual Benchmark for Explainable Hate Speech Detection and A Novel LLM-consulted Explanation Framework
  4. 2023HateRephrase: Zero- and Few-Shot Reduction of Hate Intensity in Online Posts using Large Language Models
  5. 2025Are Rules Meant to be Broken? Understanding Multilingual Moral Reasoning as a Computational Pipeline with UniMoral
  6. 2026Attribute-Based Diagnosis of LLM Alignment with Hate Speech Annotations
  7. 2025A Modular Taxonomy for Hate Speech Definitions and Its Impact on Zero-Shot LLM Classification Performance
  8. 2025Evaluating Large Language Models for Detecting Antisemitism