Morality is Contextual: Learning Interpretable Moral Contexts from Human Data with Probabilistic Clustering and Large Language Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
A key question in current AI alignment research is how to make AI algorithms learn moral values. Because human morality is highly context-dependent, actions are judged not only by their outcomes but by the context in which they occur. We present COMETH (Contextual Organization of Moral Evaluation from Textual Human inputs), a framework that integrates a probabilistic context learner with LLM-based semantic abstraction and human moral evaluations to model how context shapes the acceptability of ambiguous actions. We curate an empirically grounded dataset of 300 scenarios across six core actions relative to three moral rules (violating "Do not kill", "Do not deceive", and "Do not break the law") and collect ternary judgments (Blame/Neutral/Support) from N=101 participants. A preprocessing pipeline standardizes actions via an LLM filter and MiniLM embeddings with K-means, producing robust, reproducible core-action clusters. COMETH then learns action-specific moral contexts by clustering scenarios online from human judgment distributions using principled divergence criteria. To generalize and explain predictions, a Generalization module extracts concise, non-evaluative binary contextual features and learns feature weights in a transparent likelihood-based model. Empirically, COMETH roughly doubles alignment score with most human judgments relative to end-to-end LLM prompting (60% vs. 30% on average), while revealing which contextual features drive its predictions. The contributions are: (i) an empirically grounded moral-context dataset, (ii) a reproducible pipeline combining human judgments with model-based context learning and LLM semantics, and (iii) a more interpretable alternative than end-to-end LLMs for context-sensitive moral prediction and explanation.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 30 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Dec 2025.
Builds on
18 of 30 references.
References · 18
- 2022Discovering Language Model Behaviors with Model-Written Evaluationscited by 805
- 2023Eureka: Human-Level Reward Design via Coding Large Language Modelscited by 542
- 2020Artificial Intelligence, Values and Alignmentcited by 443
- 2023AI Alignment: A Comprehensive Surveycited by 256
- 2020Social Chemistry 101: Learning to Reason about Social and Moral Normscited by 253
- 2023Evaluating the Moral Beliefs Encoded in LLMscited by 211
- 2023Guiding Pretraining in Reinforcement Learning with Large Language Modelscited by 185
- 2025Qwen2.5-1M Technical Reportcited by 158
- 2025Emergent Misalignment: Narrow finetuning can produce broadly misaligned LLMscited by 158
- 2024Social Choice Should Guide AI Alignment in Dealing with Diverse Human Feedbackcited by 95
- 2022The Moral Integrity Corpus: A Benchmark for Ethical Dialogue Systemscited by 92
- 2024Strong and weak alignment of large language models with human valuescited by 27
6 more
- 2024The Moral Turing Test: Evaluating Human-LLM Alignment in Moral Decision-Makingcited by 12
- 2024Zero-shot Model-based Reinforcement Learning using Large Language Modelscited by 6
- 2022When Is It Acceptable to Break the Rules? Knowledge Representation of Moral Judgement Based on Empirical Datacited by 5
- 2023Exploring Qualitative Research Using LLMscited by 5
- 2025Human Misperception of Generative-AI Alignment: A Laboratory Experimentcited by 3
- 2024Debunking Robot Rights Metaphysically, Ethically, and Legallycited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.