pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2510.01569 · v3 · submitted 2025-10-02 · 💻 cs.AI · cs.CL

Recognition: unknown

InvThink: Premortem Reasoning for Safer Language Models

Authors on Pith no claims yet
classification 💻 cs.AI cs.CL
keywords invthinksafetythreealignmentanalyzebaselinesenumerateexisting
0
0 comments X
read the original abstract

We present InvThink, a training and prompting framework that requires the model to enumerate, analyze, and constrain potential failures before generating its final response. Unlike existing safety alignment methods that optimize only for safe final responses, InvThink structures generation into three steps: (1) enumerate potential harms, (2) analyze their consequences, (3) generate the response under explicit mitigation constraints. We observe three findings: (i) InvThink shows higher safety scores at larger model sizes, compared to existing safety prompting and alignment baselines. (ii) InvThink mitigates the safety tax. Models trained with INVTHINK preserve their reasoning capability on standard benchmarks. (iii) beyond general safety tasks, InvThink also reduces harmful behavior in professional ethics domains (medicine, finance, law) and in agentic misalignment scenarios, achieving up to 32% reduction in harmfulness over zero-shot baselines and 16% over SafetyPrompt. We extend InvThink with supervised fine-tuning, and GRPO-based reinforcement learning across three LLM families.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Self-ReSET: Learning to Self-Recover from Unsafe Reasoning Trajectories

    cs.AI 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Self-ReSET is a reinforcement learning approach that lets large reasoning models learn to recover from their own unsafe reasoning trajectories, improving robustness to adversarial jailbreaks while preserving utility.

  2. Internalizing Safety Understanding in Large Reasoning Models via Verification

    cs.AI 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Training large reasoning models only on safety verification tasks internalizes safety understanding and boosts robustness to out-of-domain jailbreaks, providing a stronger base for reinforcement learning alignment tha...

  3. To Lie or Not to Lie? Investigating The Biased Spread of Global Lies by LLMs

    cs.CL 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    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.