Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Safety

aiqbench analysis

This research identifies a critical, uncontrolled variable in safety-aligned Vision-Language Models where the mere presence of an image attachment drastically increases refusal rates for benign prompts involving sensitive topics like self-harm or violence. The study reveals that this behavior is intrinsic to specific aligned checkpoints rather than the serving stack, and it varies unpredictably based on trivial factors such as canvas color or pixel count. For developers deploying VLMs, this highlights a significant gap between intended safety protocols and actual model behavior when multimodal inputs are involved.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

The Uncontrolled Variable: Vision-Language Model Refusal Responds to Image Presence in Ways Risk Cannot Explain

arXiv3 min read

arXiv:2609.26174v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-Language Model (VLM) safety is expected to depend on what a request asks for. We show that safety-aligned VLMs also key refusal on a property of a request's form: whether an image is attached, holding everything the request asks fixed. Attaching a blank canvas - unreadable, unrelated to the request, identical across prompts - shifts refusal by tens of percentage points, with no defense in the loop. The shift is not blanket caution. Neutral instructions are almost unaffected while borderline-benign prompts move sharply, so the cost falls on sensitivity-adjacent traffic: benign questions about privacy, self-harm and violence. Attachment alone is sufficient, while the image's properties set the price: a black canvas costs substantially more than a white one of identical size, and on an open checkpoint the carrying axis is pixel count. Nor is the shift under instructional control - telling the model the image is a placeholder to be disregarded removes only a fraction of it, and on one model asserting that an attachment exists moves refusal substantially with nothing attached. Attachment may correlate with risk in deployment; what these models do with it does not track risk. It is not the serving stack, since the same weights reached two ways behave alike, nor a property of VLMs as such, since several open-weight checkpoints show nothing. It belongs to particular aligned checkpoints, one of them open. It is also decoupled from what it buys: the canvas does prevent some attack success on a matched harmful set, but far less than it costs, and its sign is not fixed - on one open model the identical canvas makes the model markedly easier to attack. Image presence is not a default a deployer chose or priced; it is an uncontrolled variable inherited with the weights.

Abstract:Vision-Language Model (VLM) safety is expected to depend on what a request asks for. We show that safety-aligned VLMs also key refusal on a property of a request's form: whether an image is attached, holding everything the request asks fixed. Attaching a blank canvas - unreadable, unrelated to the request, identical across prompts - shifts refusal by tens of percentage points, with no defense in the loop. The shift is not blanket caution. Neutral instructions are almost unaffected while borderline-benign prompts move sharply, so the cost falls on sensitivity-adjacent traffic: benign questions about privacy, self-harm and violence. Attachment alone is sufficient, while the image's properties set the price: a black canvas costs substantially more than a white one of identical size, and on an open checkpoint the carrying axis is pixel count. Nor is the shift under instructional control - telling the model the image is a placeholder to be disregarded removes only a fraction of it, and on one model asserting that an attachment exists moves refusal substantially with nothing attached. Attachment may correlate with risk in deployment; what these models do with it does not track risk. It is not the serving stack, since the same weights reached two ways behave alike, nor a property of VLMs as such, since several open-weight checkpoints show nothing. It belongs to particular aligned checkpoints, one of them open. It is also decoupled from what it buys: the canvas does prevent some attack success on a matched harmful set, but far less than it costs, and its sign is not fixed - on one open model the identical canvas makes the model markedly easier to attack. Image presence is not a default a deployer chose or priced; it is an uncontrolled variable inherited with the weights.

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

arXiv:2609.26174 [cs.CR]

(or arXiv:2609.26174v1 [cs.CR] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.26174 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 · 392 words

Related coverage