@inproceedings{mohammadi-etal-2026-evalmoraal,
title = "{E}val{MORAAL}: Interpretable Chain-of-Thought and {LLM}-as-Judge Evaluation for Moral Alignment in Large Language Models",
author = "Mohammadi, Hadi and
Giachanou, Anastasia and
Bagheri, Robert A.",
editor = "Mohammad, Saif M. and
Ousidhoum, Nedjma",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the 15th Joint Conference on Lexical and Computational Semantics (*{SEM} 2026)",
month = jul,
year = "2026",
address = "San Diego, California, United States",
publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
url = "https://aclanthology.org/2026.starsem-conference.34/",
pages = "497--515",
ISBN = "979-8-89176-413-2",
abstract = "We present EvalMORAAL, a transparent chain-of-thought (CoT) framework that uses two scoring methods (log-probabilities and direct ratings) plus a model-as-judge peer review to evaluate moral alignment in 20 large language models. We assess models on the World Values Survey (55 countries, 19 topics) and the PEW Global Attitudes Survey (39 countries, 8 topics). With EvalMORAAL, top models align closely with survey responses (Pearson{'}s $r \approx 0.90$ on WVS). Yet we find a clear regional difference: Western regions average $r=0.82$ while non-Western regions average $r=0.61$ (a 0.21 absolute gap), indicating a persistent regional alignment gap. Our framework adds three parts: (1) two scoring methods for all models to enable fair comparison, (2) a structured CoT protocol with self-consistency checks, and (3) a model-as-judge peer review that flags 348 conflicts using a data-driven threshold. Peer agreement relates to WVS survey alignment ($r=0.74$, $p<.001$; PEW $r=0.39$, n.s.), supporting automated quality checks. These results show real progress toward culture-aware AI while highlighting open challenges for use across regions."
}<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<modsCollection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
<mods ID="mohammadi-etal-2026-evalmoraal">
<titleInfo>
<title>EvalMORAAL: Interpretable Chain-of-Thought and LLM-as-Judge Evaluation for Moral Alignment in Large Language Models</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Hadi</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Mohammadi</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Anastasia</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Giachanou</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Robert</namePart>
<namePart type="given">A</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Bagheri</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<dateIssued>2026-07</dateIssued>
</originInfo>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<relatedItem type="host">
<titleInfo>
<title>Proceedings of the 15th Joint Conference on Lexical and Computational Semantics (*SEM 2026)</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Saif</namePart>
<namePart type="given">M</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Mohammad</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Nedjma</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Ousidhoum</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<publisher>Association for Computational Linguistics</publisher>
<place>
<placeTerm type="text">San Diego, California, United States</placeTerm>
</place>
</originInfo>
<genre authority="marcgt">conference publication</genre>
<identifier type="isbn">979-8-89176-413-2</identifier>
</relatedItem>
<abstract>We present EvalMORAAL, a transparent chain-of-thought (CoT) framework that uses two scoring methods (log-probabilities and direct ratings) plus a model-as-judge peer review to evaluate moral alignment in 20 large language models. We assess models on the World Values Survey (55 countries, 19 topics) and the PEW Global Attitudes Survey (39 countries, 8 topics). With EvalMORAAL, top models align closely with survey responses (Pearson’s r \approx 0.90 on WVS). Yet we find a clear regional difference: Western regions average r=0.82 while non-Western regions average r=0.61 (a 0.21 absolute gap), indicating a persistent regional alignment gap. Our framework adds three parts: (1) two scoring methods for all models to enable fair comparison, (2) a structured CoT protocol with self-consistency checks, and (3) a model-as-judge peer review that flags 348 conflicts using a data-driven threshold. Peer agreement relates to WVS survey alignment (r=0.74, p<.001; PEW r=0.39, n.s.), supporting automated quality checks. These results show real progress toward culture-aware AI while highlighting open challenges for use across regions.</abstract>
<identifier type="citekey">mohammadi-etal-2026-evalmoraal</identifier>
<location>
<url>https://aclanthology.org/2026.starsem-conference.34/</url>
</location>
<part>
<date>2026-07</date>
<extent unit="page">
<start>497</start>
<end>515</end>
</extent>
</part>
</mods>
</modsCollection>
%0 Conference Proceedings
%T EvalMORAAL: Interpretable Chain-of-Thought and LLM-as-Judge Evaluation for Moral Alignment in Large Language Models
%A Mohammadi, Hadi
%A Giachanou, Anastasia
%A Bagheri, Robert A.
%Y Mohammad, Saif M.
%Y Ousidhoum, Nedjma
%S Proceedings of the 15th Joint Conference on Lexical and Computational Semantics (*SEM 2026)
%D 2026
%8 July
%I Association for Computational Linguistics
%C San Diego, California, United States
%@ 979-8-89176-413-2
%F mohammadi-etal-2026-evalmoraal
%X We present EvalMORAAL, a transparent chain-of-thought (CoT) framework that uses two scoring methods (log-probabilities and direct ratings) plus a model-as-judge peer review to evaluate moral alignment in 20 large language models. We assess models on the World Values Survey (55 countries, 19 topics) and the PEW Global Attitudes Survey (39 countries, 8 topics). With EvalMORAAL, top models align closely with survey responses (Pearson’s r \approx 0.90 on WVS). Yet we find a clear regional difference: Western regions average r=0.82 while non-Western regions average r=0.61 (a 0.21 absolute gap), indicating a persistent regional alignment gap. Our framework adds three parts: (1) two scoring methods for all models to enable fair comparison, (2) a structured CoT protocol with self-consistency checks, and (3) a model-as-judge peer review that flags 348 conflicts using a data-driven threshold. Peer agreement relates to WVS survey alignment (r=0.74, p<.001; PEW r=0.39, n.s.), supporting automated quality checks. These results show real progress toward culture-aware AI while highlighting open challenges for use across regions.
%U https://aclanthology.org/2026.starsem-conference.34/
%P 497-515
Markdown (Informal)
[EvalMORAAL: Interpretable Chain-of-Thought and LLM-as-Judge Evaluation for Moral Alignment in Large Language Models](https://aclanthology.org/2026.starsem-conference.34/) (Mohammadi et al., *SEM 2026)
ACL