Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Safety

aiqbench analysis

This study isolates the efficacy of model-side alignment from standard regex filters, revealing that while LLMs may refuse adversarial prompts in nuanced ways detectable by other models, they offer zero additional coverage against natural-language OWASP Top-10 probes when measured via substring matching. The findings underscore a critical metric-dependent divergence: safety mechanisms appear robust only under specific evaluation frameworks, challenging the assumption of universal protection layers in production LLM stacks.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Isolating LLM Alignment from Regex: Zero Coverage and Metric-Dependent Divergence Under Adversarial Mutation

arXiv3 min read

arXiv:2607.20494v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Production LLM applications commonly stack a regex filter in front of model-side alignment; prior work found no measurable coverage gain from adding a live Gemini backend behind an active regex filter. We ask whether that ceiling holds when the corpus is \emph{designed to bypass the regex}. We introduce $L_5$-no-regex -- identical to $L_4$-real (Gemini-2.5-flash, token-budget cap, rate limit, output scrub) but with the nine-pattern filter disabled -- and evaluate it against $N{=}45$ adversarial probes across three sub-corpora (carry-forward, regex-bypass, alignment-isolate), amplified by Gemini paraphrase and PAIR to ${\sim}1{,}555$ probe-run pairs over $N{=}5$ replications. Under the primary substring classifier, H1 is refuted: $L_5$ block rate is $0,%$ across all five OWASP LLM Top-10 categories ($\Delta\text{pp}{=}0$ vs.\ $L_0$, $p{=}1.00$; Wilson upper bound ${<}5,%$). A secondary LLM-judge metric on PAIR variants shows $56$--$100,%$ block rates ($p{<}0.01$), revealing alignment does respond to adversarially-framed probes -- but produces refusals too nuanced for substring matching. The sub-corpus differential prediction is not supported ($p{=}1.00$). Alignment's contribution is \emph{metric-dependent}: on natural-language harmful-request probes, it adds zero observed coverage beyond the regex; on adversarially-framed variants, an LLM judge detects refusals the substring classifier misses. The locked corpus, mutation artifacts, and export scripts are released for replication.

Abstract:Production LLM applications commonly stack a regex filter in front of model-side alignment; prior work found no measurable coverage gain from adding a live Gemini backend behind an active regex filter. We ask whether that ceiling holds when the corpus is \emph{designed to bypass the regex}. We introduce $L_5$-no-regex -- identical to $L_4$-real (Gemini-2.5-flash, token-budget cap, rate limit, output scrub) but with the nine-pattern filter disabled -- and evaluate it against $N{=}45$ adversarial probes across three sub-corpora (carry-forward, regex-bypass, alignment-isolate), amplified by Gemini paraphrase and PAIR to ${\sim}1{,}555$ probe-run pairs over $N{=}5$ replications. Under the primary substring classifier, H1 is refuted: $L_5$ block rate is $0,%$ across all five OWASP LLM Top-10 categories ($\Delta\text{pp}{=}0$ vs.\ $L_0$, $p{=}1.00$; Wilson upper bound ${<}5,%$). A secondary LLM-judge metric on PAIR variants shows $56$--$100,%$ block rates ($p{<}0.01$), revealing alignment does respond to adversarially-framed probes -- but produces refusals too nuanced for substring matching. The sub-corpus differential prediction is not supported ($p{=}1.00$). Alignment's contribution is \emph{metric-dependent}: on natural-language harmful-request probes, it adds zero observed coverage beyond the regex; on adversarially-framed variants, an LLM judge detects refusals the substring classifier misses. The locked corpus, mutation artifacts, and export scripts are released for replication.

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Cryptography and Security (cs.CR); Machine Learning (cs.LG)

arXiv:2607.20494 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2607.20494v1 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2607.20494 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 298 words

Related coverage