The paper introduces COLAGUARD, a guardrail model that embeds multi-step safety reasoning into a continuous latent space, allowing efficient hidden-state propagation during inference. Compared to existing methods, COLAGUARD achieves an 8.24‑point macro‑F1 improvement over Llama Guard 3 and matches the explicit reasoning baseline GuardReasoner, while delivering a 12.9× speedup and a 22.4× reduction in token usage across ten moderation settings and eight safety benchmarks.
arXiv:2608. 03838v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reasoning-based guard models improve LLM safeguards, but decoding explicit rationales for every interaction makes them costly to deploy.
arXiv:2607. 06326v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models deployed in open-world applications require safety guardrails that are both robust to complex risks and efficient enough for low-latency runtime moderation.
arXiv:2607. 17575v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We propose ARBITER, a novel LLM guardrail framework that introduces two key ideas: (i) dual-hypothesis reasoning, a reasoning method for LLM guardrails that explicitly considers both safe and unsafe interpretations of a prompt before making a safety decision, and (ii) multi-component supervised fine-tuning (MC-SFT), a structured training loss for reasoning-based guardrails that decomposes LLM outputs into logical components and weights them according to their importance.
Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly deployed in consumer, medical, financial, and enterprise applications. This broad deployment expands the safety surface: risks can arise from multimodal question answering, assistant responses, and cross-modal composition, while moderation policies may vary across products, regions, and deployment stages.
arXiv:2606. 16808v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: While Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) excel at complex tasks, they remain highly vulnerable to sophisticated jailbreaks and direct harmful queries.
arXiv:2607. 02072v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in domains requiring guardrails to detect unsafe, off-topic, or adversarial prompts.
arXiv:2606. 05805v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM-based guardrails typically safeguard agents by evaluating proposed actions or inputs before execution, producing safety signals such as binary allow/deny decisions, risk categories, and/or explanatory rationales about potential policy violations.
arXiv:2608.27580v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Safety guardrails serve as the last line of defense against harmful inputs and outputs of large language models (LLMs), yet they are trained and ev...
arXiv:2607. 09697v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Existing safety mechanisms for multimodal large language models (MLLMs) face a fundamental trade-off between safety and utility.
arXiv:2606. 07108v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Recent advances in Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) demonstrate remarkable performance improvements by iteratively reflecting, exploring, and executing complex tasks, yet suffer from inefficiencies due to redundant reasoning, known as "overthinking".
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.
TRACE is a new benchmark that evaluates the safety of Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) across the entire inference pipeline, including prompts, reasoning traces, and final responses. It provides prompts in two languages covering nine risk categories and ten attack strategies, and for each prompt four LRMs generate traces and responses that are annotated for safety with supporting evidence extracted from the source text. Evaluation of 18 guardrail models on TRACE shows that detecting unsafe content in reasoning traces is much harder than in prompts or final responses, and that current models struggle to extract the necessary evidence.