Cross-Modality Safety Alignment

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2406.15279v1
• Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 16:14:15 GMT
• Title: Cross-Modality Safety Alignment
• Authors: Siyin Wang, Xingsong Ye, Qinyuan Cheng, Junwen Duan, Shimin Li, Jinlan Fu, Xipeng Qiu, Xuanjing Huang,
• Abstract summary: We introduce a novel safety alignment challenge called Safe Inputs but Unsafe Output (SIUO) to evaluate cross-modality safety alignment. To empirically investigate this problem, we developed the SIUO, a cross-modality benchmark encompassing 9 critical safety domains, such as self-harm, illegal activities, and privacy violations. Our findings reveal substantial safety vulnerabilities in both closed- and open-source LVLMs, underscoring the inadequacy of current models to reliably interpret and respond to complex, real-world scenarios.
• Score: 73.8765529028288
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: As Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) becomes increasingly integrated into various facets of human life, ensuring the safety and ethical alignment of such systems is paramount. Previous studies primarily focus on single-modality threats, which may not suffice given the integrated and complex nature of cross-modality interactions. We introduce a novel safety alignment challenge called Safe Inputs but Unsafe Output (SIUO) to evaluate cross-modality safety alignment. Specifically, it considers cases where single modalities are safe independently but could potentially lead to unsafe or unethical outputs when combined. To empirically investigate this problem, we developed the SIUO, a cross-modality benchmark encompassing 9 critical safety domains, such as self-harm, illegal activities, and privacy violations. Our findings reveal substantial safety vulnerabilities in both closed- and open-source LVLMs, such as GPT-4V and LLaVA, underscoring the inadequacy of current models to reliably interpret and respond to complex, real-world scenarios.

Related papers

• Multimodal Situational Safety [73.63981779844916]
  We present the first evaluation and analysis of a novel safety challenge termed Multimodal Situational Safety. For an MLLM to respond safely, whether through language or action, it often needs to assess the safety implications of a language query within its corresponding visual context. We develop the Multimodal Situational Safety benchmark (MSSBench) to assess the situational safety performance of current MLLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-08T16:16:07Z)
• Superficial Safety Alignment Hypothesis [8.297367440457508]
  We propose the Superficial Safety Alignment Hypothesis (SSAH), which posits that safety alignment should teach an otherwise unsafe model to choose the correct reasoning direction. We identify four types of attribute-critical components in safety-aligned large language models (LLMs) Our findings show that freezing certain safety-critical components 7.5% during fine-tuning allows the model to retain its safety attributes while adapting to new tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-07T19:53:35Z)
• Safetywashing: Do AI Safety Benchmarks Actually Measure Safety Progress? [59.96471873997733]
  We propose an empirical foundation for developing more meaningful safety metrics and define AI safety in a machine learning research context. We aim to provide a more rigorous framework for AI safety research, advancing the science of safety evaluations and clarifying the path towards measurable progress.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-31T17:59:24Z)
• Anomalous State Sequence Modeling to Enhance Safety in Reinforcement Learning [0.0]
  We propose a safe reinforcement learning (RL) approach that utilizes an anomalous state sequence to enhance RL safety. In experiments on multiple safety-critical environments including self-driving cars, our solution approach successfully learns safer policies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-29T10:30:07Z)
• AI Risk Management Should Incorporate Both Safety and Security [185.68738503122114]
  We argue that stakeholders in AI risk management should be aware of the nuances, synergies, and interplay between safety and security. We introduce a unified reference framework to clarify the differences and interplay between AI safety and AI security.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-29T21:00:47Z)
• Uniformly Safe RL with Objective Suppression for Multi-Constraint Safety-Critical Applications [73.58451824894568]
  The widely adopted CMDP model constrains the risks in expectation, which makes room for dangerous behaviors in long-tail states. In safety-critical domains, such behaviors could lead to disastrous outcomes. We propose Objective Suppression, a novel method that adaptively suppresses the task reward maximizing objectives according to a safety critic.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-23T23:22:06Z)
• The Art of Defending: A Systematic Evaluation and Analysis of LLM Defense Strategies on Safety and Over-Defensiveness [56.174255970895466]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) play an increasingly pivotal role in natural language processing applications. This paper presents Safety and Over-Defensiveness Evaluation (SODE) benchmark.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-30T17:37:06Z)
• Safety-Gymnasium: A Unified Safe Reinforcement Learning Benchmark [12.660770759420286]
  We present an environment suite called Safety-Gymnasium, which encompasses safety-critical tasks in both single and multi-agent scenarios. We offer a library of algorithms named Safe Policy Optimization (SafePO), comprising 16 state-of-the-art SafeRL algorithms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-19T08:19:28Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.