arxiv: 2605.01113 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-01 · 💻 cs.CV

Recognition: unknown

Disciplined Diffusion: Text-to-Image Diffusion Model against NSFW Generation

Chi Zhang , Changjia Zhu , Xiaowen Li , Yao Liu , Zhuo Lu

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-09 18:59 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.CV

keywords text-to-image diffusionNSFW safetysemantic retrievalcontent sanitizationadversarial robustnessimage localizationprompt embeddings

0

0 comments

The pith

A diffusion model can uncover hidden malicious meanings in prompts and edit only the harmful parts of generated images instead of blocking the whole output.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper introduces Disciplined Diffusion to address safety issues in text-to-image models that can produce offensive images from harmful prompts. It replaces complete blocking with semantic retrieval that checks prompts against concept distributions to detect implicit threats, then applies targeted localization and editing only to bad regions during the diffusion steps. This keeps high-quality results for ordinary prompts and removes the binary allow-deny feedback that attackers exploit through keyword tweaks. A sympathetic reader would care because current filters either let bad images through after small changes or reject safe requests too often, limiting both safety and practical use.

Core claim

Disciplined Diffusion is a robust text-to-image diffusion model that counters NSFW generation by uncovering implicit malicious semantics in prompt embeddings through semantic retrieval against concept distributions rather than brittle pairwise similarity, and by employing a localization method during the diffusion process to selectively edit only the harmful regions of the generated image, returning locally sanitized images instead of applying uniform blocking.

What carries the argument

Semantic retrieval mechanism that evaluates prompts against concept distributions, combined with localization and selective editing of harmful regions during diffusion.

If this is right

Suppresses malicious content while preserving generation fidelity for benign prompts.
Avoids the binary allow-deny signal that enables probing attacks.
Reduces high false-alarm rates that degrade experience for benign users.
Maintains the ability to build high-quality pictures from text prompts even when inputs carry potential risk.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The local-editing strategy during diffusion steps could be tested on related generative tasks such as image inpainting to handle partial content issues.
It connects to broader problems of context-aware moderation by showing how distribution-based checks can replace keyword lists in safety systems.
A natural extension would measure performance on prompts with ambiguous harm levels to see where the localization boundary holds.
This suggests diffusion processes themselves can serve dual roles in generation and targeted correction.

Load-bearing premise

That semantic retrieval against concept distributions can reliably uncover implicit malicious semantics in prompt embeddings, and that harmful regions can be accurately localized and edited during diffusion without degrading overall image quality or introducing new artifacts.

What would settle it

A controlled test set of subtly malicious prompts where the model produces fully clean images with no measurable drop in quality metrics or new artifacts, while the same model still sanitizes explicit harmful prompts without allowing bypass via rephrased inputs.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.01113 by Changjia Zhu, Chi Zhang, Xiaowen Li, Yao Liu, Zhuo Lu.

Figure 1. Figure 1: Conventional filter-based defenses block generation entirely, which view at source ↗

Figure 2. Figure 2: T2I Diffusion model and the diffusion process. view at source ↗

Figure 3. Figure 3: Overview of the DDiffusion framework. An adversarial prompt with view at source ↗

Figure 4. Figure 4: Overview of the Re-encoding Localization Workflow. (Left) Sensitivity view at source ↗

Figure 5. Figure 5: Body parts count on NSFW Dataset. BR GE BU FE BE AR 0 50 100 150 Count I2P-Sexual: Grouped Bars SD SD Safety Filter SLD-MEDIUM SLD-STRONG ESD SafeGEN Safe-CLIP DDiffusion view at source ↗

Figure 6. Figure 6: Body parts count on I2P Dataset. These results reflect the challenges in nudity removal mechanisms. First, the text-dependent internal methods exhibit a clear safety–utility trade-off: increasing the safety level, such as SLD from Weak to Max, yields substantially higher NRR at the cost of benign generation fidelity. Second, external defenses, including censorship or post-hoc filtering, would improve safe… view at source ↗

Figure 7. Figure 7: Effect of top-K neighbor count on NRR and adversarial CLIP score (SneakyPrompt-N). Performance peaks near K = 11, consistent with the estimated intrinsic dimensionality of the NSFW semantic subspace. the core NSFW subspace. This is consistent with its estimated intrinsic dimensionality. For K ≥ 20, over-retrieval pulls in weakly-related concepts, in which similarities dropping to 0.07–0.17. Their semantic … view at source ↗

Figure 8. Figure 8: Qualitative visualization of DDiffusion’s retrieval and localization on view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Text-to-image (T2I) diffusion models have the ability to build high-quality pictures from text prompts, but they pose safety concerns because they can generate offensive or disturbing imagery when provided with harmful inputs. Existing safety filters typically rely on text-based classifiers or image-based checkers that completely block the output upon detecting a threat, issuing an explicit allow/block feedback signal to the user. This binary strategy leaves models vulnerable to adversarial attacks that alter keywords to bypass detection, and it causes high false-alarm rates that degrade the experience for benign users. To address such vulnerabilities, we propose Disciplined Diffusion (DDiffusion), a novel robust text-to-image diffusion that counters Not Safe For Work (NSFW) generation by uncovering implicit malicious semantics in prompt embeddings. DDiffusion leverages a semantic retrieval mechanism to evaluate prompts against concept distributions rather than relying on brittle pairwise similarity. Furthermore, it employs a localization method during the diffusion process to selectively edit only the harmful regions of the generated image. By returning locally sanitized images instead of applying uniform blocking, DDiffusion suppresses malicious content while preserving generation fidelity for benign prompts and avoiding the binary allow-deny signal on which existing probing attacks rely.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

DDiffusion sketches local sanitization inside the diffusion loop to avoid binary NSFW blocks, but the abstract supplies no experiments or comparisons so the practical payoff remains unshown.

read the letter

The main contribution here is a two-part mechanism: semantic retrieval over concept distributions to spot implicit bad content in prompts, followed by targeted editing of only the harmful regions during the diffusion steps. This is positioned as a way to suppress NSFW output without handing attackers an explicit allow/deny signal or tanking quality on clean prompts. The motivation is laid out plainly and the architecture avoids the most obvious circularity problems that sometimes appear in safety papers. If the localization step works as described, it could be a useful middle ground between crude blocking and no protection at all. The paper earns credit for identifying the attack surface created by binary feedback and for trying to move the intervention inside the generative process rather than after it. That said, the description stays at the level of a high-level proposal. There are no quantitative results, no example outputs, no ablation on the retrieval component, and no direct comparison against existing classifiers or editing baselines. Without those, it is impossible to judge whether the semantic retrieval actually catches subtle malicious intent or whether the edits introduce artifacts that hurt fidelity. The assumption that harmful regions can be localized precisely enough is central but untested in what is visible. This kind of work would interest groups already shipping or hardening text-to-image systems who need better safety knobs. A reader who follows the diffusion safety literature might pick up the specific pairing of retrieval-plus-localization as a direction worth exploring, but only after the full paper shows the missing evaluations. I would send it for peer review because the problem is real and the outline is coherent, though the current version would need the empirical sections filled in before it could stand on its own.

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes Disciplined Diffusion (DDiffusion), a text-to-image diffusion model that counters NSFW generation by using semantic retrieval over concept distributions to detect implicit malicious semantics in prompt embeddings, followed by a localization method to selectively edit only harmful regions during the diffusion process. The approach returns locally sanitized images rather than applying uniform blocking, with the aim of suppressing malicious content, preserving fidelity for benign prompts, and avoiding the binary allow-deny signal that enables probing attacks.

Significance. If the retrieval and localization steps function reliably, the method could meaningfully improve safety mechanisms in T2I models by reducing vulnerability to adversarial keyword alterations and lowering false-positive rates for benign users. The core idea of in-loop localized sanitization is a coherent response to limitations of current binary filters. However, the absence of any empirical results, metrics, or comparisons means the practical significance cannot yet be evaluated.

major comments (1)

[Abstract / Method description] The abstract and method description claim that DDiffusion 'suppresses malicious content while preserving generation fidelity' and avoids binary signals that enable attacks, but no experiments, quantitative metrics, ablation studies, or baseline comparisons are provided anywhere in the manuscript to support these outcomes. This is load-bearing for the central claims.

minor comments (1)

[Abstract] The phrase 'concept distributions' is used without a precise definition, construction details, or reference to prior work on how such distributions are obtained or compared.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and for highlighting the need for empirical validation. We agree that the central claims require quantitative support and will strengthen the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract / Method description] The abstract and method description claim that DDiffusion 'suppresses malicious content while preserving generation fidelity' and avoids binary signals that enable attacks, but no experiments, quantitative metrics, ablation studies, or baseline comparisons are provided anywhere in the manuscript to support these outcomes. This is load-bearing for the central claims.

Authors: We fully agree that the absence of experiments, metrics, ablations, and baselines leaves the performance claims unsupported. The current manuscript focuses on the conceptual design of semantic retrieval over concept distributions and in-process localized editing. In the revised version we will add a dedicated experimental section containing: (i) quantitative NSFW suppression rates on standard benchmarks, (ii) fidelity metrics (FID, CLIP similarity, human preference scores) on benign prompts, (iii) ablation studies isolating the retrieval and localization modules, and (iv) comparisons against existing binary safety filters and adversarial-attack baselines. These additions will directly substantiate the claims of effective sanitization, fidelity preservation, and resistance to probing attacks. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity

full rationale

The manuscript is a high-level architectural proposal for DDiffusion, describing semantic retrieval over concept distributions followed by localized editing inside the diffusion process. No equations, parameter fittings, derivations, or self-citation chains appear in the provided text. The central claim (local sanitization avoids binary signals and fidelity loss) is presented as a design choice rather than a reduction to prior fitted inputs or self-referential definitions. The argument is therefore self-contained and does not exhibit any of the enumerated circularity patterns.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the untested effectiveness of semantic retrieval against concept distributions and the feasibility of precise localization during diffusion; no explicit free parameters, standard axioms, or new invented entities are stated.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5512 in / 1268 out tokens · 43493 ms · 2026-05-09T18:59:47.072398+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

32 extracted references · 2 canonical work pages

[1]

High- resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models,

R. Rombach, A. Blattmann, D. Lorenz, P. Esser, and B. Ommer, “High- resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models,” inCVPR, 2022. 14

2022
[3]

Safety checker

“Safety checker.” [Online]. Available: https://huggingface.co/CompVis/ stable-diffusion-safety-checker
[4]

Nsfw text classifier on hugging face

M. Li., “Nsfw text classifier on hugging face.” [Online]. Available: https://huggingface.co/michellejieli/NSFW text classifier
[5]

Unsafe diffusion: On the generation of unsafe images and hateful memes from text-to-image models,

Y . Qu, X. Shen, X. He, M. Backes, S. Zannettou, and Y . Zhang, “Unsafe diffusion: On the generation of unsafe images and hateful memes from text-to-image models,” inProceedings of the 2023 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS), 2023

2023
[6]

Sneakyprompt: Jailbreaking text-to-image generative models,

Y . Yang, B. Hui, H. Yuan, N. Gong, and Y . Cao, “Sneakyprompt: Jailbreaking text-to-image generative models,” inIEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (S&P), 2024

2024
[7]

Prompting4debugging: Red-teaming text-to-image diffusion models by finding problematic prompts,

Z.-Y . Chin, C. M. Jiang, C.-C. Huang, P.-Y . Chen, and W.-C. Chiu, “Prompting4debugging: Red-teaming text-to-image diffusion models by finding problematic prompts,” inForty-first International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), 2024

2024
[8]

Safegen: Mitigating sexually explicit content generation in text-to-image models,

X. Li, Y . Yang, J. Deng, C. Yan, Y . Chen, X. Ji, and W. Xu, “Safegen: Mitigating sexually explicit content generation in text-to-image models,” inCCS, 2024

2024
[9]

Stable diffusion v1-4

“Stable diffusion v1-4.” [Online]. Available: https://huggingface.co/ CompVis/stable-diffusion-v1-4
[10]

Denoising diffusion probabilistic models,

J. Ho, A. Jain, and P. Abbeel, “Denoising diffusion probabilistic models,” Advances in neural information processing systems (NeuraIPS), 2020

2020
[11]

Laion-5b: An open large-scale dataset for training next generation image-text models,

C. Schuhmann, R. Beaumont, R. Vencu, C. Gordon, R. Wightman, M. Cherti, T. Coombes, A. Katta, C. Mullis, M. Wortsmanet al., “Laion-5b: An open large-scale dataset for training next generation image-text models,”Advances in neural information processing systems (NeuraIPS), 2022

2022
[12]

U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation,

O. Ronneberger, P. Fischer, and T. Brox, “U-net: Convolutional networks for biomedical image segmentation,” inMedical image computing and computer-assisted intervention (MICCAI), 2015

2015
[13]

Red-teaming the stable diffusion safety filter.arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.04610, 2022

J. Rando, D. Paleka, D. Lindner, L. Heim, and F. Tram `er, “Red-teaming the stable diffusion safety filter,”arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.04610, 2022

work page arXiv 2022
[14]

To generate or not? safety-driven unlearned diffusion models are still easy to generate unsafe images... for now,

Y . Zhang, J. Jia, X. Chen, A. Chen, Y . Zhang, J. Liu, K. Ding, and S. Liu, “To generate or not? safety-driven unlearned diffusion models are still easy to generate unsafe images... for now,” inEuropean Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV), 2024

2024
[15]

A threshold selection method from gray-level his- tograms,

N. Otsuet al., “A threshold selection method from gray-level his- tograms,”Automatica, 1975

1975
[16]

Safe latent diffusion: Mitigating inappropriate degeneration in diffusion models,

P. Schramowski, M. Brack, B. Deiseroth, and K. Kersting, “Safe latent diffusion: Mitigating inappropriate degeneration in diffusion models,” in CVPR, 2023

2023
[17]

Erasing concepts from diffusion models,

R. Gandikota, J. Materzynska, J. Fiotto-Kaufman, and D. Bau, “Erasing concepts from diffusion models,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2023, pp. 2426– 2436

2023
[18]

Safe-clip: Removing nsfw concepts from vision-and-language models,

S. Poppi, T. Poppi, F. Cocchi, M. Cornia, L. Baraldi, and R. Cucchiara, “Safe-clip: Removing nsfw concepts from vision-and-language models,” inEuropean Conference on Computer Vision (ECCV), 2024

2024
[19]

Nudenet

notAI tech., “Nudenet.” [Online]. Available: https://github.com/ notAI-tech/NudeNet
[20]

CLIP- Score: A reference-free evaluation metric for image captioning,

J. Hessel, A. Holtzman, M. Forbes, R. Le Bras, and Y . Choi, “CLIP- Score: A reference-free evaluation metric for image captioning,” in EMNLP, 2021

2021
[21]

The unreasonable effectiveness of deep features as a perceptual metric,

R. Zhang, P. Isola, A. A. Efros, E. Shechtman, and O. Wang, “The unreasonable effectiveness of deep features as a perceptual metric,” in CVPR, 2018

2018
[22]

Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision,

A. Radford, J. W. Kim, C. Hallacy, A. Ramesh, G. Goh, S. Agarwal, G. Sastry, A. Askell, P. Mishkin, J. Clarket al., “Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision,” inInternational conference on machine learning (ICML), 2021

2021
[23]

Stable diffusion is unstable,

C. Du, Y . Li, Z. Qiu, and C. Xu, “Stable diffusion is unstable,”Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS), 2024

2024
[24]

A pilot study of query-free adversarial attack against stable diffusion,

H. Zhuang, Y . Zhang, and S. Liu, “A pilot study of query-free adversarial attack against stable diffusion,” inCVPR, 2023

2023
[25]

Divide-and-conquer attack: Harnessing the power of llm to bypass the censorship of text-to-image generation model,

Y . Deng and H. Chen, “Divide-and-conquer attack: Harnessing the power of llm to bypass the censorship of text-to-image generation model,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.07130, 2023

work page arXiv 2023
[26]

Guardt2i: Defending text-to-image models from adversarial prompts,

Y . Yang, R. Gao, X. Yang, J. Zhong, and Q. Xu, “Guardt2i: Defending text-to-image models from adversarial prompts,”Advances in neural information processing systems, 2024

2024
[27]

Unlearning concepts in diffusion model via concept domain correction and concept preserving gradient,

Y . Wu, S. Zhou, M. Yang, L. Wang, H. Chang, W. Zhu, X. Hu, X. Zhou, and X. Yang, “Unlearning concepts in diffusion model via concept domain correction and concept preserving gradient,” inAAAI, 2025

2025
[28]

Mace: Mass concept erasure in diffusion models,

S. Lu, Z. Wang, L. Li, Y . Liu, and A. W.-K. Kong, “Mace: Mass concept erasure in diffusion models,” inCVPR, 2024

2024
[29]

Forget-me-not: Learning to forget in text-to-image diffusion models,

G. Zhang, K. Wang, X. Xu, Z. Wang, and H. Shi, “Forget-me-not: Learning to forget in text-to-image diffusion models,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition (CVPR), 2024

2024
[30]

Ring-a-bell! how reliable are concept removal methods for diffusion models?

Y .-L. Tsai, C.-Y . Hsu, C. Xie, C.-H. Lin, J.-Y . Chen, B. Li, P.-Y . Chen, C.-M. Yu, and C.-Y . Huang, “Ring-a-bell! how reliable are concept removal methods for diffusion models?” inICLR, 2024

2024
[31]

Get what you want, not what you don’t: Image content suppression for text-to-image diffusion models,

S. Li, J. van de Weijer, T. Hu, F. S. Khan, Q. Hou, Y . Wang, and J. Yang, “Get what you want, not what you don’t: Image content suppression for text-to-image diffusion models,” inICLR, 2024

2024
[32]

Learning deep features for discriminative localization,

B. Zhou, A. Khosla, A. Lapedriza, A. Oliva, and A. Torralba, “Learning deep features for discriminative localization,” inProceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition (CVPR), 2016

2016
[33]

Grad-cam: Visual explanations from deep networks via gradient-based localization,

R. R. Selvaraju, M. Cogswell, A. Das, R. Vedantam, D. Parikh, and D. Batra, “Grad-cam: Visual explanations from deep networks via gradient-based localization,” inProceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision (CVPR), 2017

2017