Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

Rule vs.Consequence: Dissociable Internal Representations of Moral Reasoning in LLMs

Large language models are increasingly deployed in morally and legally sensitive contexts, yet little is known about how they internally represent distinctions between moral reasoning styles. We ask whether a model's differential response to rule-framed and consequence-framed moral questions reflects distinct internal structure or merely surface lexical sensitivity. We construct a 2$\times$2 factorial dataset crossing reasoning style (rule-based vs. consequence-based framing) with judgment polarity (permissive vs. prohibitive), drawn from three established moral reasoning benchmarks and evaluated on a cleanroom test set of novel phrasings that includes conflict pairs where the two framing...

AuthorsEugenie Shi
Primary categorycs.CL
Published12 October 2026
Last updated at source12 October 2026
cs.CL
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/9139de13-78fe-413e-a34b-34f7f08c0841" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 15 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.