ClarityEthic: Explainable Moral Judgment Utilizing Contrastive Ethical Insights from Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2412.12848v1
• Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2024 12:22:44 GMT
• Title: ClarityEthic: Explainable Moral Judgment Utilizing Contrastive Ethical Insights from Large Language Models
• Authors: Yuxi Sun, Wei Gao, Jing Ma, Hongzhan Lin, Ziyang Luo, Wenxuan Zhang,
• Abstract summary: We introduce a novel moral judgment approach called textitEthic that leverages LLMs' reasoning ability and contrastive learning to uncover relevant social norms. Our method outperforms state-of-the-art approaches in moral judgment tasks.
• Score: 30.301864398780648
• License:
• Abstract: With the rise and widespread use of Large Language Models (LLMs), ensuring their safety is crucial to prevent harm to humans and promote ethical behaviors. However, directly assessing value valence (i.e., support or oppose) by leveraging large-scale data training is untrustworthy and inexplainable. We assume that emulating humans to rely on social norms to make moral decisions can help LLMs understand and predict moral judgment. However, capturing human values remains a challenge, as multiple related norms might conflict in specific contexts. Consider norms that are upheld by the majority and promote the well-being of society are more likely to be accepted and widely adopted (e.g., "don't cheat,"). Therefore, it is essential for LLM to identify the appropriate norms for a given scenario before making moral decisions. To this end, we introduce a novel moral judgment approach called \textit{ClarityEthic} that leverages LLMs' reasoning ability and contrastive learning to uncover relevant social norms for human actions from different perspectives and select the most reliable one to enhance judgment accuracy. Extensive experiments demonstrate that our method outperforms state-of-the-art approaches in moral judgment tasks. Moreover, human evaluations confirm that the generated social norms provide plausible explanations that support the judgments. This suggests that modeling human moral judgment with the emulating humans moral strategy is promising for improving the ethical behaviors of LLMs.

Related papers

• Normative Evaluation of Large Language Models with Everyday Moral Dilemmas [0.0]
  We evaluate large language models (LLMs) on complex, everyday moral dilemmas sourced from the "Am I the Asshole" (AITA) community on Reddit. Our results demonstrate that large language models exhibit distinct patterns of moral judgment, varying substantially from human evaluations on the AITA subreddit.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-30T01:29:46Z)
• Exploring and steering the moral compass of Large Language Models [55.2480439325792]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have become central to advancing automation and decision-making across various sectors. This study proposes a comprehensive comparative analysis of the most advanced LLMs to assess their moral profiles.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-27T16:49:22Z)
• Ethical Reasoning over Moral Alignment: A Case and Framework for In-Context Ethical Policies in LLMs [19.675262411557235]
  We argue that instead of morally aligning LLMs to specific set of ethical principles, we should infuse generic ethical reasoning capabilities into them. We develop a framework that integrates moral dilemmas with moral principles pertaining to different foramlisms of normative ethics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-11T07:27:34Z)
• Rethinking Machine Ethics -- Can LLMs Perform Moral Reasoning through the Lens of Moral Theories? [78.3738172874685]
  Making moral judgments is an essential step toward developing ethical AI systems. Prevalent approaches are mostly implemented in a bottom-up manner, which uses a large set of annotated data to train models based on crowd-sourced opinions about morality. This work proposes a flexible top-down framework to steer (Large) Language Models (LMs) to perform moral reasoning with well-established moral theories from interdisciplinary research.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-29T15:57:32Z)
• ClarifyDelphi: Reinforced Clarification Questions with Defeasibility Rewards for Social and Moral Situations [81.70195684646681]
  We present ClarifyDelphi, an interactive system that learns to ask clarification questions. We posit that questions whose potential answers lead to diverging moral judgments are the most informative. Our work is ultimately inspired by studies in cognitive science that have investigated the flexibility in moral cognition.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-20T16:33:09Z)
• When to Make Exceptions: Exploring Language Models as Accounts of Human Moral Judgment [96.77970239683475]
  AI systems need to be able to understand, interpret and predict human moral judgments and decisions. A central challenge for AI safety is capturing the flexibility of the human moral mind. We present a novel challenge set consisting of rule-breaking question answering.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-04T09:04:27Z)
• Moral Stories: Situated Reasoning about Norms, Intents, Actions, and their Consequences [36.884156839960184]
  We investigate whether contemporary NLG models can function as behavioral priors for systems deployed in social settings. We introduce 'Moral Stories', a crowd-sourced dataset of structured, branching narratives for the study of grounded, goal-oriented social reasoning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-31T17:28:01Z)
• Scruples: A Corpus of Community Ethical Judgments on 32,000 Real-Life Anecdotes [72.64975113835018]
  Motivated by descriptive ethics, we investigate a novel, data-driven approach to machine ethics. We introduce Scruples, the first large-scale dataset with 625,000 ethical judgments over 32,000 real-life anecdotes. Our dataset presents a major challenge to state-of-the-art neural language models, leaving significant room for improvement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-20T17:34:15Z)
• Aligning AI With Shared Human Values [85.2824609130584]
  We introduce the ETHICS dataset, a new benchmark that spans concepts in justice, well-being, duties, virtues, and commonsense morality. We find that current language models have a promising but incomplete ability to predict basic human ethical judgements. Our work shows that progress can be made on machine ethics today, and it provides a steppingstone toward AI that is aligned with human values.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-05T17:59:16Z)
• Reinforcement Learning Under Moral Uncertainty [13.761051314923634]
  An ambitious goal for machine learning is to create agents that behave ethically. While ethical agents could be trained by rewarding correct behavior under a specific moral theory, there remains widespread disagreement about the nature of morality. This paper proposes two training methods that realize different points among competing desiderata, and trains agents in simple environments to act under moral uncertainty.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-08T16:40:12Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.