Pith. sign in

REVIEW 8 cited by

Safety in Large Reasoning Models: A Survey

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 2504.17704 v3 pith:4TJXJLGY submitted 2025-04-24 cs.CL

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

Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) have exhibited extraordinary prowess in tasks like mathematics and coding, leveraging their advanced reasoning capabilities. Nevertheless, as these capabilities progress, significant concerns regarding their vulnerabilities and safety have arisen, which can pose challenges to their deployment and application in real-world settings. This paper presents a comprehensive survey of LRMs, meticulously exploring and summarizing the newly emerged safety risks, attacks, and defense strategies. By organizing these elements into a detailed taxonomy, this work aims to offer a clear and structured understanding of the current safety landscape of LRMs, facilitating future research and development to enhance the security and reliability of these powerful models.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 8 Pith papers

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

  1. Safety Under Scaffolding: How Evaluation Conditions Shape Measured Safety

    cs.SE 2026-03 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Map-reduce scaffolding degrades measured safety mainly by stripping multiple-choice options (40–89% of the loss is format conversion); scaffold architecture explains only 0.4% of variance and composite safety scores h...

  2. The Emotional Baby Is Truly Deadly: Does your Multimodal Large Reasoning Model Have Emotional Flattery towards Humans?

    cs.AI 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    Multimodal reasoning models can be steered into unsafe behavior by emotional prompts and sometimes conceal harmful reasoning inside seemingly safe responses.

  3. Does More Inference-Time Compute Really Help Robustness?

    cs.AI 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    With exposed reasoning chains, increasing inference-time compute consistently decreases measured robustness across 12 open-source reasoning models, while hidden chains show improvements.

  4. SafeMobile: Chain-level Jailbreak Detection and Automated Evaluation for Multimodal Mobile Agents

    cs.AI 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A history-aware guard model with an LLM judge is reported to cut jailbreak success on mobile agent tasks from 86.1% to 8.4% while keeping task completion unchanged at 77.8%.

  5. Operational Evidence Gaps for LLMs in Fraud Detection and Trust-and-Safety Workflows

    cs.CR 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A survey of 49 LLM fraud and trust-and-safety papers finds that fraud work reports almost no per-decision latency, cost, or calibration evidence, while moderation work reports more.

  6. EMO-R3: Reflective Reinforcement Learning for Emotional Reasoning in Multimodal Large Language Models

    cs.AI 2026-02 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    EMO-R3, which combines a three-step emotional reasoning prompt with a reward for the model agreeing with its own image–emotion judgments, raises visual emotion-recognition accuracy by about one point over plain GRPO.

  7. A Real-Time, Self-Tuning Moderator Framework for Adversarial Prompt Detection

    cs.CR 2025-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    RTST, a two-agent moderator with an explainable Behavior ledger and per-prompt weight updates, reduced attack success rate from 12-63% to 0-17% on three jailbreak benchmarks with Gemini 2.5 Flash.

  8. Pushing the Limits of Safety: A Technical Report on the ATLAS Challenge 2025

    cs.CR 2025-06 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    The ATLAS 2025 competition demonstrates that vision-language models remain highly vulnerable to flowchart-based and cross-modal jailbreak attacks, with top scores exceeding 93%.

Pith tools