Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Safety Reasoning with Guidelines

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 2502.04040 v2 pith:IYT3OGXG submitted 2025-02-06 cs.LG cs.AIcs.CL

Safety Reasoning with Guidelines

classification cs.LG cs.AIcs.CL
keywords safetyreasoningattacksknowledgemodeltrainingguidelineslatent
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Training safe LLMs remains a critical challenge. The most widely used method, Refusal Training (RT), struggles to generalize against various Out-of-Distribution (OOD) jailbreaking attacks. Although various advanced methods have been proposed to address this issue, we instead question whether OOD attacks inherently surpass the capability of vanilla RT. Evaluations using Best-of-N (BoN) reveal significant safety improvements as N increases, indicating models possess adequate latent safety knowledge but RT fails to consistently elicit it under OOD scenarios. Further domain adaptation analysis reveals that direct RT causes reliance on superficial shortcuts, resulting in non-generalizable representation mappings. Inspired by our findings, we propose training model to perform safety reasoning for each query. Specifically, we synthesize reasoning supervision aligned with specified guidelines that reflect diverse perspectives on safety knowledge. This encourages model to engage in deeper reasoning, explicitly eliciting and utilizing latent safety knowledge for each query. Extensive experiments show that our method significantly improves model generalization against OOD attacks.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Addressing Over-Refusal in LLMs with Competing Rewards

    cs.LG 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    SEAR trains one LLM via adversarial process rewards to explore harmful reasoning paths but flip to safe outputs, reducing over-refusal while preserving safety.

  2. Reasoning Up the Instruction Ladder for Controllable Language Models

    cs.CL 2025-10 conditional novelty 6.0

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

  3. Reason Before You Retrieve: Agentic Planning for Multi-modal RAG

    cs.AI 2026-06 reject novelty 5.0

    MM-R2 claims SOTA multimodal RAG accuracy on InfoSeek and Encyclopedic VQA via intent grounding plus a 10-topic KnowledgeMap, but its teacher trajectories leak the gold Wikipedia page and omit the image.