arXiv:2607. 01859v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Safety training for large language models (LLMs) is conducted predominantly in English, leaving uncertain how well safety mechanisms generalize to low-resource languages and mixed-language code-switching.
By Joshua Adrian Cahyono
arXiv:2608.29936v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Safety alignment of large language models (LLMs) degrades across languages, yet the internal mechanism driving this asymmetry remains poorly understo...
By Apoorva Upadhyaya, Sandipan Sikdar
Safety training for large language models (LLMs) is conducted predominantly in English, leaving uncertain how well safety mechanisms generalize to low-resource languages and mixed-language code-switching. We show that this creates an epistemic gap in which models confidently generate harmful responses for inputs that fall outside the distribution of their safety training.
The paper investigates whether large language models (LLMs) can internally detect harmful content, bypassing external guardrails that add latency and computational cost. By extracting activations from LLaMA‑3.1‑8B and training lightweight MLP probes, the authors achieve high F1 scores (99%, 83%, and 84%) on WildJailbreak, Beavertails, and AEGIS 2.0 benchmarks, rivaling much larger guard models while reducing overhead. This suggests that internal state monitoring can provide efficient safety checks for resource‑constrained, time‑critical deployments.
By Alizishaan Khatri, Chiquita Prabhu, Omkar Neogi
arXiv:2607. 11475v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Safety alignment in large language models can be fragile under fine-tuning, as even benign task adaptation may increase harmful compliance.
By Aznaur Aliev, Carlos Hinojosa, Abdelrahman Eldesokey, Bang An, Bernard Ghanem, Yibo Yang
arXiv:2605. 17173v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models exhibit safety degradation in non-English languages.
By Max Zhang, Ameen Patel, Sang T. Truong, Sanmi Koyejo