Pith. sign in

REVIEW 6 cited by

SaRO: Enhancing LLM Safety through Reasoning-based Alignment

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

arxiv 2504.09420 v1 pith:6J3DFGYF submitted 2025-04-13 cs.CL

classification cs.CL
keywords alignmentreasoningsafetyoptimizationsarojailbreakllmsmodels
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Current safety alignment techniques for large language models (LLMs) face two key challenges: (1) under-generalization, which leaves models vulnerable to novel jailbreak attacks, and (2) over-alignment, which leads to the excessive refusal of benign instructions. Our preliminary investigation reveals semantic overlap between jailbreak/harmful queries and normal prompts in embedding space, suggesting that more effective safety alignment requires a deeper semantic understanding. This motivates us to incorporate safety-policy-driven reasoning into the alignment process. To this end, we propose the Safety-oriented Reasoning Optimization Framework (SaRO), which consists of two stages: (1) Reasoning-style Warmup (RW) that enables LLMs to internalize long-chain reasoning through supervised fine-tuning, and (2) Safety-oriented Reasoning Process Optimization (SRPO) that promotes safety reflection via direct preference optimization (DPO). Extensive experiments demonstrate the superiority of SaRO over traditional alignment methods.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 6 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Oyster-II: Reinforcement Learning for Constructive Safety Alignment in Large Language Models

    cs.AI 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Zero-RL multi-stage constructive safety alignment with SERL and long-context training lets a 14B model match much larger models on safety without collapsing helpfulness or style.

  2. Does More Inference-Time Compute Really Help Robustness?

    cs.AI 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    With exposed reasoning chains, increasing inference-time compute consistently decreases measured robustness across 12 open-source reasoning models, while hidden chains show improvements.

  3. Interpretation Meets Safety: A Survey on Interpretation Methods and Tools for Improving LLM Safety

    cs.SE 2025-06 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

    A new survey organizes LLM interpretation methods by workflow stage and connects them to safety enhancement strategies and tools, covering around 70 works.

  4. Should LLM Safety Be More Than Refusing Harmful Instructions?

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    LLMs that can decrypt common ciphers show safety failures split across two dimensions, refusing too much or generating unsafe output, and current defenses fix one side while breaking the other.

  5. A Comprehensive Survey on Trustworthiness in Reasoning with Large Language Models

    cs.CL 2025-09 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A structured literature survey concluding that reasoning capabilities do not automatically make LLMs more trustworthy and can introduce new vulnerabilities in safety, robustness, and privacy.

  6. Alignment and Safety in Large Language Models: Safety Mechanisms, Training Paradigms, and Emerging Challenges

    cs.AI 2025-07 reject novelty 1.0 of 10

    A broad survey of LLM alignment that catalogs objectives, benchmarks, SFT/RLHF/DPO methods, and safety challenges, without contributing new experimental or theoretical results.

Pith tools