analiza aiqbench
This research introduces "cunning questions" as a novel training method to enhance LLM vigilance against misleading premises and out-of-distribution jailbreak attacks. By forcing models to scrutinize underlying intent rather than just surface semantics, the approach significantly reduces attack success rates and improves subsequent safety fine-tuning. These findings offer a concrete pathway for building more robust AI systems that can detect latent risks before harmful actions are planned.
Beyond Routine Compliance: Cunning Data Cultivates Safety Vigilance in Large Language Models
arXiv:2609.18515v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Safety alignment teaches large language models (LLMs) to recognize harmful requests and reject risky instructions. Yet aligned models can fail when harmful intent is concealed within seemingly benign contexts. Robust safety therefore requires both knowledge of safety boundaries and \textbf{vigilance}: the ability to detect unusual premises, misleading reasoning, and latent risks beneath surface-level semantics. Vigilance requires models to scrutinize a request's underlying intent and assumptions before acting. To cultivate this capability, we introduce \textbf{cunning questions}, which are not necessarily safety-related but contain misleading premises, atypical reasoning, or subtle inconsistencies. We hypothesize that learning to look beyond such reasoning traps can transfer to safety-critical scenarios. Experiments show that Cunning training improves robustness to out-of-distribution jailbreak attacks and strengthens subsequent safety fine-tuning. Furthermore, augmenting an existing state-of-the-art safety alignment pipeline with Cunning establishes a new state of the art across our evaluated settings, reducing mean ASR across nine backbone--benchmark combinations from 17.40\% to 15.05\%. Trace analysis after matched safety fine-tuning suggests that safety judgments are more likely to govern responses before harmful planning begins. A conditional theoretical analysis further characterizes when invariance learned from cunning data can transfer to safety-related inputs. These findings suggest that cunning data can strengthen model vigilance and complement conventional safety alignment.
Abstract:Safety alignment teaches large language models (LLMs) to recognize harmful requests and reject risky instructions. Yet aligned models can fail when harmful intent is concealed within seemingly benign contexts. Robust safety therefore requires both knowledge of safety boundaries and \textbf{vigilance}: the ability to detect unusual premises, misleading reasoning, and latent risks beneath surface-level semantics. Vigilance requires models to scrutinize a request's underlying intent and assumptions before acting. To cultivate this capability, we introduce \textbf{cunning questions}, which are not necessarily safety-related but contain misleading premises, atypical reasoning, or subtle inconsistencies. We hypothesize that learning to look beyond such reasoning traps can transfer to safety-critical scenarios. Experiments show that Cunning training improves robustness to out-of-distribution jailbreak attacks and strengthens subsequent safety fine-tuning. Furthermore, augmenting an existing state-of-the-art safety alignment pipeline with Cunning establishes a new state of the art across our evaluated settings, reducing mean ASR across nine backbone--benchmark combinations from 17.40\% to 15.05\%. Trace analysis after matched safety fine-tuning suggests that safety judgments are more likely to govern responses before harmful planning begins. A conditional theoretical analysis further characterizes when invariance learned from cunning data can transfer to safety-related inputs. These findings suggest that cunning data can strengthen model vigilance and complement conventional safety alignment.
Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2609.18515 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2609.18515v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.18515 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.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 301 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

AI in healthcare: applications and best practices
Databricks · 24 iul. 2026

Digital States 2026: AI Moves From Experiment to Infrastructure
govtech.com · 24 sept. 2026
State of the Field: AI for Epistemics and Coordination
LessWrong · 2 oct. 2026

Honest Abacus AI Review: ChatLLM, DeepAgent, AI Studio & More
KDnuggets · 4 aug. 2026