Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Red Teaming Visual Language Models

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 2401.12915 v1 pith:DNS7IPC2 submitted 2024-01-23 cs.AI cs.CLcs.CV

classification cs.AIcs.CLcs.CV
keywords teamingmodelsvlmsrtvlmalignmentaspectscurrentdataset
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

VLMs (Vision-Language Models) extend the capabilities of LLMs (Large Language Models) to accept multimodal inputs. Since it has been verified that LLMs can be induced to generate harmful or inaccurate content through specific test cases (termed as Red Teaming), how VLMs perform in similar scenarios, especially with their combination of textual and visual inputs, remains a question. To explore this problem, we present a novel red teaming dataset RTVLM, which encompasses 10 subtasks (e.g., image misleading, multi-modal jail-breaking, face fairness, etc) under 4 primary aspects (faithfulness, privacy, safety, fairness). Our RTVLM is the first red-teaming dataset to benchmark current VLMs in terms of these 4 different aspects. Detailed analysis shows that 10 prominent open-sourced VLMs struggle with the red teaming in different degrees and have up to 31% performance gap with GPT-4V. Additionally, we simply apply red teaming alignment to LLaVA-v1.5 with Supervised Fine-tuning (SFT) using RTVLM, and this bolsters the models' performance with 10% in RTVLM test set, 13% in MM-Hal, and without noticeable decline in MM-Bench, overpassing other LLaVA-based models with regular alignment data. This reveals that current open-sourced VLMs still lack red teaming alignment. Our code and datasets will be open-source.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. MLA-Trust: Benchmarking Trustworthiness of Multimodal LLM Agents in GUI Environments

    cs.AI 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    MLA-Trust introduces 34 tasks and an evaluation toolbox showing that GUI-interacting multimodal agents are substantially less trustworthy than static multimodal chat models.

  2. Watch, Listen, Understand, Mislead: Tri-modal Adversarial Attacks on Short Videos for Content Appropriateness Evaluation

    cs.CV 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Coordinated misleading text descriptions of video, audio, and meaning flip the appropriateness labels assigned by most multimodal LLMs in about 90% of test videos.

Pith tools