mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

From Training to Generalization: Improving Moral Reasoning Through Pragmatic Inference

arXiv 2509.24102 ↗First posted 28 Sep 2025cs.CLcited by 2

On the map: LLM reasoning → Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation

Abstract (arXiv)

Although moral reasoning has emerged as a promising research direction for large language models (LLMs), a persistent generalization challenge remains: LLMs often achieve strong performance on training data but struggle to generalize their moral reasoning to unseen test data. From a linguistic perspective, moral reasoning is a pragmatic process in which moral judgments are inferred based on the context of social norms underlying a given moral situation. However, existing approaches overlook this pragmatic nature because of two major bottlenecks: (1) LLMs are primarily skilled in capturing distributional semantics, which differs from the pragmatic nature of moral reasoning; (2) there is currently no effective solution for grounding language in the moral context. In this paper, we develop a pragmatic inference approach that enables LLMs to infer moral judgments for a given moral situation by combining metapragmatic links with Moral Foundations Theory. Specifically, metapragmatic links serve to bridge the gap between distributional semantics and pragmatics, whereas Moral Foundations Theory provides a principled basis for grounding language in moral contexts. Experimental results demonstrate that our approach substantially improves LLMs' generalization in moral reasoning, highlighting the potential of pragmatic inference for future moral reasoning research.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Reasoning benchmarks and evaluation, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 14 of its 62 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Sep 2025.

Builds on

14 of 62 references.

Closest ancestors · 2

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025Pragmatic Inference Chain (PIC) Improving LLMs' Reasoning of Authentic Implicit Toxic Language3 Mar
  2. 2025Diagnosing Moral Reasoning Acquisition in Language Models: Pragmatics and Generalization23 Feb

Other references · 12

  1. 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
  2. 2023Mistral 7Bcited by 3,164
  3. 2020Aligning AI With Shared Human Valuescited by 723
  4. 2024To CoT or not to CoT? Chain-of-thought helps mainly on math and symbolic reasoningcited by 263
  5. 2021Can Machines Learn Morality? The Delphi Experimentcited by 141
  6. 2022The Goldilocks of Pragmatic Understanding: Fine-Tuning Strategy Matters for Implicature Resolution by LLMscited by 58
  7. 2024Moral Alignment for LLM Agentscited by 39
  8. 2025Metaphor and Large Language Models: When Surface Features Matter More than Deep Understandingcited by 8
  9. 2025MyGO Multiplex CoT: A Method for Self-Reflection in Large Language Models via Double Chain of Thought Thinkingcited by 5
  10. 2025CDW-CoT: Clustered Distance-Weighted Chain-of-Thoughts Reasoningcited by 3
  11. 2025Discourse Heuristics For Paradoxically Moral Self-Correctioncited by 3
  12. 2025Diagnosing the Performance Trade-off in Moral Alignment: A Case Study on Gender Stereotypescited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.

2 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Learning to Diagnose and Correct Moral Errors: Beyond Shallow Heuristics in Moral Alignment
  2. 2025One Model, Many Morals: Uncovering Cross-Linguistic Misalignments in Computational Moral Reasoning
  3. 2025Structured Moral Reasoning in Language Models: A Value-Grounded Evaluation Framework
  4. 2026Unsupervised Elicitation of Moral Values from Language Models
  5. 2026MET: Theory-Grounded and Culture-Aware Multilingual Moral Reasoning
  6. 2025Are Rules Meant to be Broken? Understanding Multilingual Moral Reasoning as a Computational Pipeline with UniMoral
  7. 2025"Pull or Not to Pull?'': Investigating Moral Biases in Leading Large Language Models Across Ethical Dilemmas
  8. 2026Understanding Moral Reasoning Trajectories in Large Language Models: Toward Probing-Based Explainability