Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

IHEval: Evaluating Language Models on Following the Instruction Hierarchy

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2502.08745 v2 pith:3QDUQG67 submitted 2025-02-12 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords instructionmodelshierarchyevaluatingihevalinstructionslanguagemessages
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

The instruction hierarchy, which establishes a priority order from system messages to user messages, conversation history, and tool outputs, is essential for ensuring consistent and safe behavior in language models (LMs). Despite its importance, this topic receives limited attention, and there is a lack of comprehensive benchmarks for evaluating models' ability to follow the instruction hierarchy. We bridge this gap by introducing IHEval, a novel benchmark comprising 3,538 examples across nine tasks, covering cases where instructions in different priorities either align or conflict. Our evaluation of popular LMs highlights their struggle to recognize instruction priorities. All evaluated models experience a sharp performance decline when facing conflicting instructions, compared to their original instruction-following performance. Moreover, the most competitive open-source model only achieves 48% accuracy in resolving such conflicts. Our results underscore the need for targeted optimization in the future development of LMs.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Many-Tier Instruction Hierarchy in LLM Agents

    cs.CL 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

    ManyIH and ManyIH-Bench address instruction conflicts in LLM agents with up to 12 privilege levels across 853 tasks, revealing frontier models achieve only ~40% accuracy.

  2. Where Instruction Hierarchy Breaks: Diagnosing and Repairing Failures in Reasoning Language Models

    cs.AI 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    A diagnostic framework localizes instruction hierarchy failures in LLMs into identification, resolution, and realization, while self-monitors reduce non-compliance by 81-99%.

  3. Reasoning Up the Instruction Ladder for Controllable Language Models

    cs.CL 2025-10 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    RLVR on ~7K verifiable system/user conflict examples teaches LLMs to prioritize higher-priority instructions, improving instruction-hierarchy and safety benchmarks.

Pith tools