REVIEW 4 cited by
Multilingual Blending: LLM Safety Alignment Evaluation with Language Mixture
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Multilingual Blending: LLM Safety Alignment Evaluation with Language Mixture
read the original abstract
As safety remains a crucial concern throughout the development lifecycle of Large Language Models (LLMs), researchers and industrial practitioners have increasingly focused on safeguarding and aligning LLM behaviors with human preferences and ethical standards. LLMs, trained on extensive multilingual corpora, exhibit powerful generalization abilities across diverse languages and domains. However, current safety alignment practices predominantly focus on single-language scenarios, which leaves their effectiveness in complex multilingual contexts, especially for those complex mixed-language formats, largely unexplored. In this study, we introduce Multilingual Blending, a mixed-language query-response scheme designed to evaluate the safety alignment of various state-of-the-art LLMs (e.g., GPT-4o, GPT-3.5, Llama3) under sophisticated, multilingual conditions. We further investigate language patterns such as language availability, morphology, and language family that could impact the effectiveness of Multilingual Blending in compromising the safeguards of LLMs. Our experimental results show that, without meticulously crafted prompt templates, Multilingual Blending significantly amplifies the detriment of malicious queries, leading to dramatically increased bypass rates in LLM safety alignment (67.23% on GPT-3.5 and 40.34% on GPT-4o), far exceeding those of single-language baselines. Moreover, the performance of Multilingual Blending varies notably based on intrinsic linguistic properties, with languages of different morphology and from diverse families being more prone to evading safety alignments. These findings underscore the necessity of evaluating LLMs and developing corresponding safety alignment strategies in a complex, multilingual context to align with their superior cross-language generalization capabilities.
Forward citations
Cited by 4 Pith papers
-
Ethics Testing: Proactive Identification of Generative AI System Harms
Ethics testing is introduced as a systematic approach to generate tests that identify software harms induced by unethical behavior in generative AI outputs.
-
To Lie or Not to Lie? Investigating The Biased Spread of Global Lies by LLMs
LLMs propagate misinformation more in lower-resource languages and lower-HDI countries, with input safety classifiers and retrieval-augmented fact-checking showing cross-lingual and regional gaps.
-
Phonetic Perturbations Reveal Tokenizer-Rooted Safety Gaps in LLMs
Phonetic perturbations fragment safety-critical tokens in LLMs, suppressing attribution scores while preserving input understanding and causing safety mechanisms to fail despite good comprehension.
-
Multilingual jailbreaking of LLMs using low-resource languages
Multi-turn prompts in Afrikaans, Kiswahili, isiXhosa and isiZulu achieve 52-83% harmful response rates across GPT, Claude, Gemini and others, rising further with native-speaker red-teaming, showing translation quality...
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.