# Learning to Extract Context for Context-Aware LLM Inference

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.11986 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2512.11986/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 26 of its 30 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 12 Dec 2025.

## Builds on (most cited first, 26 of 26)

- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2201.11903/) (2022)
- [DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.03300/) (2024)
- [DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.12948/) (2025)
- [Qwen2.5 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.15115/) (2024)
- [Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.15043/) (2023)
- [Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.08073/) (2022)
- [Llama Guard: LLM-based Input-Output Safeguard for Human-AI Conversations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.06674/) (2023)
- [XSTest: A Test Suite for Identifying Exaggerated Safety Behaviours in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.01263/) (2023)
- [Deliberative Alignment: Reasoning Enables Safer Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.16339/) (2024)
- [Chain of Thought Monitorability: A New and Fragile Opportunity for AI Safety](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.11473/) (2025)
- [SafeDecoding: Defending against Jailbreak Attacks via Safety-Aware Decoding](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.08983/) (2024)
- [OR-Bench: An Over-Refusal Benchmark for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.20947/) (2024)
- [Do Large Language Models Know What They Don't Know?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.18153/) (2023)
- [WildTeaming at Scale: From In-the-Wild Jailbreaks to (Adversarially) Safer Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.18510/) (2024)
- [SafeChain: Safety of Language Models with Long Chain-of-Thought Reasoning Capabilities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.12025/) (2025)
- [On Prompt-Driven Safeguarding for Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.18018/) (2024)
- [Utility Engineering: Analyzing and Controlling Emergent Value Systems in AIs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.08640/) (2025)
- [Selectively Answering Ambiguous Questions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14613/) (2023)
- [Trading Inference-Time Compute for Adversarial Robustness](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.18841/) (2025)
- [Aligning Language Models to Explicitly Handle Ambiguity](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.11972/) (2024)
- [Self-Guard: Empower the LLM to Safeguard Itself](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.15851/) (2023)
- [Phi-3 Safety Post-Training: Aligning Language Models with a "Break-Fix" Cycle](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.13833/) (2024)
- [Reasoning as an Adaptive Defense for Safety](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2507.00971/) (2025)
- [SafeKey: Amplifying Aha-Moment Insights for Safety Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.16186/) (2025)
- [Data Advisor: Dynamic Data Curation for Safety Alignment of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.05269/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [Beyond "I cannot fulfill this request": Alleviating Rigid Rejection in LLMs via Label Enhancement](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2605.07883/) (2026)
- [PACE: Towards Surfacing Hidden Conflicts in User Requests](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.03293/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

User prompts to large language models (LLMs) are often ambiguous or under-specified, and subtle contextual cues shaped by user intentions, prior knowledge, and risk factors strongly influence what constitutes an appropriate response. Misinterpreting intent or risks may lead to unsafe outputs, while overly cautious interpretations can cause unnecessary refusal of benign requests. In this paper, we question the conventional framework in which LLMs generate immediate responses to requests without considering broader contextual factors. User requests are situated within broader contexts such as intentions, knowledge, and prior experience, which strongly influence what constitutes an appropriate answer. We propose a framework that extracts and leverages such contextual information from the user prompt itself. Specifically, a reinforcement learning based context generator, designed in an autoencoder-like fashion, is trained to infer contextual signals grounded in the prompt and use them to guide response generation. This approach is particularly important for safety tasks, where ambiguous requests may bypass safeguards while benign but confusing requests can trigger unnecessary refusals. Experiments show that our method reduces harmful responses by an average of 5.6% on the SafetyInstruct dataset across multiple foundation models and improves the harmonic mean of attack success rate and compliance on benign prompts by 6.2% on XSTest and WildJailbreak. These results demonstrate the effectiveness of context extraction for safer and more reliable LLM inferences.