Rohan Subramanian Thomas, Shikhar Shiromani, Abdullah Chaudhry, Ruizhe Li, Vasu Sharma, Kevin Zhu
Prompt design affects the moral judgments and refusal behavior produced by large language models (LLMs), yet controlled comparisons remain fragmented across datasets and models. We introduce ProMoral-Bench, a benchmark-style comparison of 10 prompting paradigms across four LLM families. Using ETHICS, Scruples, WildJailbreak, and our 200-pair ETHICS-Contrast set, we report task-level metrics together with Moral Competence Score (MCS), jailbreak/over-refusal Safety Robustness Score (SRS), and Unified Moral Safety Score (UMSS). UMSS is a study-specific relative summary of MCS and SRS, not an absolute measure of model safety or moral grounding. In this fixed-template evaluation, compact exemplar-guided scaffolds attain stronger competence-robustness trade-offs at lower token cost than the particular multi-stage variants tested, although multi-stage prompting occasionally improves jailbreak refusal. The few-shot demonstrations are non-overlapping but drawn from the evaluation distributions, so their advantage should not be read as out-of-distribution robustness. Code and data are available at https://github.com/rohanthomas334-sketch/ProMoral_Bench.
Chen Yang, Ruping Xu, Ruizhe Li University of Aberdeen, Bin Cao Zhejiang University of Technology, Jing Fan Zhejiang University of Technology
Extracting structured procedural knowledge from unstructured business documents is a critical yet unresolved bottleneck in process automation. While prior work has focused on extracting linear action flows from instructional texts (e.g., recipes), it has insufficiently addressed the complex logical structures—such as conditional branching and parallel execution—that are pervasive in real-world regulatory and administrative documents. Furthermore, existing benchmarks are limited by simplistic schemas and shallow logical dependencies, restricting progress toward logic-aware large language models (LLMs). To bridge this “Logic Gap”, we introduce \textbf{BREX}, a carefully curated benchmark comprising 409 real-world business documents and 2,855 expert-annotated rules. Unlike prior datasets centered on narrow service scenarios, BREX spans over 30 vertical domains, covering scientific, industrial, administrative, and financial regulations.We further propose \textbf{ExIde}, a structure-aware reasoning framework that investigates five distinct prompting strategies, ranging from implicit semantic alignment to executable grounding via pseudo-code generation, enabling explicit modeling of rule dependencies and providing an out-of-the-box framework for different business customers without finetuning their own LLMs. We benchmark ExIde using 13 state-of-the-art LLMs. Our extensive evaluation reveals that: (1) Executable grounding serves as a superior inductive bias, significantly outperforming standard prompts in rule extraction; and (2) Reasoning-optimized models demonstrate a distinct advantage in tracing long-range dependencies and non-linear rule dependencies compared to standard instruction-tuned models.
尚无 AI 解读，展示原文摘要
cs.CL
Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · 2026 · 正式发表