Risky Business: Measuring The Faithfulness-Safety Tension
arXiv:2608. 03745v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning offers a promising window into model monitoring.
arXiv:2606. 25013v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Today's reasoning models use thinking tokens to attain stronger performance on benchmarks than their instruction-tuned counterparts.
arXiv:2608. 03745v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning offers a promising window into model monitoring.
arXiv:2608. 15673v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language model guardrails can be viewed as policy-consistency problems: a system must determine which policy-relevant facts hold in a prompt-response pair and what those facts imply under a given policy.
The paper investigates why large reasoning models (LRMs) lose safety alignment when faced with harmful queries. By analyzing token-level refusal dynamics, the authors identify a vulnerability called Onset Refusal Collapse (ORC), where the refusal signal drops sharply at the first generated token, leading to unsafe responses. They introduce SafeToken, a lightweight inference-time intervention that injects a learned safety anchor at reasoning onset, which mitigates ORC, improves safety on harmful-query benchmarks, and largely preserves reasoning utility.
EOPSA (Efficient On-Policy Self-Distilled Safety Alignment) addresses inefficiencies in On-Policy Self-Distillation (OPSD) for safety alignment by focusing training on safety-critical tokens. It introduces Adaptive Rollout Scheduling, which limits generation length based on a Teacher Rescue Rate metric, and Selective Distillation, which filters out safety-neutral tokens to concentrate gradient updates on safety-pivotal transitions. Experiments on models up to 32B parameters show that EOPSA reduces rollout computation by about 50% and backpropagates through only roughly 2% of tokens, outperforming full-token distillation baselines in safety compliance and reasoning retention.
arXiv:2610.00601v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Reasoning-enabled VLA policies expose chain-of-thought (CoT) traces that appear to explain and guide their actions, creating a potential interface fo...
arXiv:2606. 30128v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting improves LLM reasoning, but the source is contested: do the intermediate steps help because they carry useful semantic content, or because conditioning on more tokens buys extra computation before the model commits to an answer?
arXiv:2606. 02835v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) improve performance by generating explicit intermediate reasoning traces through increased test-time compute, yet the assumption that longer reasoning is consistently beneficial remains under-examined.
arXiv:2606. 11211v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The ability of large language models (LLMs) to express calibrated uncertainty is important for safe deployment.
arXiv:2603. 01437v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: As chain of thought (CoT) has become central to scaling reasoning capabilities in large language models (LLMs), it has also emerged as a promising tool for interpretability, suggesting the opportunity to understand model decisions through verbalized reasoning.
The paper investigates a training‑free early‑exit technique that inserts an end‑of‑think (EoT) token to terminate chain‑of‑thought (CoT) reasoning in large reasoning models. It finds that the injected EoT often fails to cleanly switch the model from reasoning to answering, leading to continued reasoning‑like generation—termed spurious CoT termination—whose length scales with the amount of reasoning saved. By increasing attention to the EoT token through Exit‑token Attention Biasing (EAB), the authors reduce spurious termination and shorten the answering phase across multiple models and benchmarks.
arXiv:2607. 29062v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Model capabilities have improved in large part due to scaling chain of thought.
arXiv:2607. 11266v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting has significantly advanced the reasoning capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs), yet it often incurs substantial computational costs due to over-reasoning: the generation of redundant, verbose, or irrelevant steps.