Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

ThinkGuard: Deliberative Slow Thinking Leads to Cautious Guardrails

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 2502.13458 v2 pith:D6WJZD7U submitted 2025-02-19 cs.CL cs.AIcs.CRcs.LG

classification cs.CLcs.AIcs.CRcs.LG
keywords safetythinkguardabilityclassificationcritique-augmentedcritiquesdeliberativefine-tuned
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Ensuring the safety of large language models (LLMs) is critical as they are deployed in real-world applications. Existing guardrails rely on rule-based filtering or single-pass classification, limiting their ability to handle nuanced safety violations. To address this, we propose ThinkGuard, a critique-augmented guardrail model that distills knowledge from high-capacity LLMs by generating structured critiques alongside safety labels. Fine-tuned on critique-augmented data, the captured deliberative thinking ability drastically enhances the guardrail's cautiousness and interpretability. Evaluated on multiple safety benchmarks, ThinkGuard achieves the highest average F1 and AUPRC, outperforming all baselines. Compared to LLaMA Guard 3, ThinkGuard improves accuracy by 16.1% and macro F1 by 27.0%. Moreover, it surpasses label-only fine-tuned models, confirming that structured critiques enhance both classification precision and nuanced safety reasoning while maintaining computational efficiency.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. RedCoder: Automated Multi-Turn Red Teaming for Code LLMs

    cs.SE 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A multi-turn red-teaming agent trained on simulated attacker-defender conversations induces vulnerable code at higher rates than prior attack methods across several code LLMs.

  2. Beyond Safe Answers: A Benchmark for Evaluating True Risk Awareness in Large Reasoning Models

    cs.AI 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A new benchmark shows that top reasoning models identify all relevant risks in under 40% of cases even when their final answers look safe.

  3. ShieldVLM: Safeguarding the Multimodal Implicit Toxicity via Deliberative Reasoning with LVLMs

    cs.MM 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    ShieldVLM detects multimodal implicit toxicity through deliberate cross-modal reasoning, outperforming existing moderation APIs and models on the new MMIT benchmark.

  4. From Rogue to Safe AI: The Role of Explicit Refusals in Aligning LLMs with International Humanitarian Law

    cs.CY 2025-06 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Across eight LLMs, most explicitly IHL-violating prompts are refused, and a single system-level safety prompt raises explanatory refusal rates in six of eight models, though the benchmark is not publicly released.

Pith tools