# EADC: Evaluation of Advanced and Deep-level Compliance in Large Language Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.26175 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.26175/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 20 of its 48 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 22 Sep 2026.

## Builds on (most cited first, 20 of 20)

- [GPT-4 Technical Report](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2303.08774/) (2023)
- [The Llama 3 Herd of Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.21783/) (2024)
- [Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.08073/) (2022)
- [InternVL3.5: Advancing Open-Source Multimodal Models in Versatility, Reasoning, and Efficiency](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2508.18265/) (2025)
- [DeepSeek-V4: Towards Highly Efficient Million-Token Context Intelligence](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.19348/) (2026)
- [Red Teaming Language Models with Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.03286/) (2022)
- [Tree of Attacks: Jailbreaking Black-Box LLMs Automatically](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.02119/) (2023)
- [A Survey on Large Language Models for Code Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.00515/) (2024)
- [GLM-5: from Vibe Coding to Agentic Engineering](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.15763/) (2026)
- [The Hidden Risks of Large Reasoning Models: A Safety Assessment of R1](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.12659/) (2025)
- [Obfuscated Activations Bypass LLM Latent-Space Defenses](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.09565/) (2024)
- [SHIELD: Evaluation and Defense Strategies for Copyright Compliance in LLM Text Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.12975/) (2024)
- [COMPL-AI Framework: A Technical Interpretation and LLM Benchmarking Suite for the EU Artificial Intelligence Act](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.07959/) (2024)
- [Jailbreaking Large Language Models with Symbolic Mathematics](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2409.11445/) (2024)
- [AIReg-Bench: Benchmarking Language Models That Assess AI Regulation Compliance](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2510.01474/) (2025)
- [StealthGraph: Exposing Domain-Specific Risks in LLMs through Knowledge-Graph-Guided Harmful Prompt Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.04740/) (2026)
- [A Different Approach to AI Safety: Proceedings from the Columbia Convening on Openness in Artificial Intelligence and AI Safety](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2506.22183/) (2025)
- [Safety Compliance: Rethinking LLM Safety Reasoning through the Lens of Compliance](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2509.22250/) (2025)
- [Knowledge Graph Representations for LLM-Based Policy Compliance Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.27713/) (2026)
- [GraphAttack: Exploiting Representational Blindspots in LLM Safety Mechanisms](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2504.13052/) (2025)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Models (LLMs) have been used in various industries. However, ensuring their compliance with complex laws and regulatory frameworks remains a great challenge. Existing evaluation paradigms mainly rely on static benchmarks that suffer from three severe limitations: First, the compliance rules being used do not comply with the requirements of Artificial Intelligence (AI) laws and regulations; Second, they only handle apparent, explicit compliance risks, leaving implicit and covert compliance risks undetected; Third, they fail to track the systematic propagation of risks along logical dependency chains or evaluate compliance within nuanced, context-based real-world scenarios. To bridge this critical gap, we introduce EADC, a novel advanced evaluation benchmark of LLMs based on an AI compliance knowledge graph and AI compliance legal experts. By mapping abstract legal rules into structured logical multi-relational graphs, our framework enables automated, evolving agents to distill and synthesize highly sophisticated adversarial scenarios. This compliance benchmark is reviewed and corrected by human AI legal experts throughout the whole process. The resulting dataset (4,435+ QA pairs) provides an extensive, multi-dimensional taxonomy covering critical regulatory frontiers, including bias and discrimination, fairness, personal privacy protection, and values. Crucially, our compliance dataset moves beyond shallow string-matching by incorporating contextual long-horizon interactions and logic-driven hazard chains, capturing deeply embedded compliance anomalies that bypass traditional filters. Experiment evaluations demonstrate that our framework exposes critical regulatory blind spots in state-of-the-art LLMs, offering a rigorous, AI laws and regulations-aligned benchmark to safeguard high-level and deep compliance in the application of LLMs.