ReasoningGuard: Safeguarding Large Reasoning Models with Inference-time Safety Aha Moments

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.04204v1
• Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2025 08:35:10 GMT
• Title: ReasoningGuard: Safeguarding Large Reasoning Models with Inference-time Safety Aha Moments
• Authors: Yuquan Wang, Mi Zhang, Yining Wang, Geng Hong, Xiaoyu You, Min Yang,
• Abstract summary: ReasoningGuard injects timely safety aha moments to steer harmless while helpful reasoning processes.<n>Our approach outperforms seven existing safeguards, achieving state-of-the-art safety defenses.
• Score: 18.198349215500183
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) have demonstrated impressive performance in reasoning-intensive tasks, but they remain vulnerable to harmful content generation, particularly in the mid-to-late steps of their reasoning processes. Existing defense mechanisms, however, rely on costly fine-tuning and additional expert knowledge, which restricts their scalability. In this work, we propose ReasoningGuard, an inference-time safeguard for LRMs, which injects timely safety aha moments to steer harmless while helpful reasoning processes. Leveraging the model's internal attention behavior, our approach accurately identifies critical points in the reasoning path, and triggers spontaneous, safety-oriented reflection. To safeguard both the subsequent reasoning steps and the final answers, we further implement a scaling sampling strategy during the decoding phase, selecting the optimal reasoning path. Inducing minimal extra inference cost, ReasoningGuard effectively mitigates three types of jailbreak attacks, including the latest ones targeting the reasoning process of LRMs. Our approach outperforms seven existing safeguards, achieving state-of-the-art safety defenses while effectively avoiding the common exaggerated safety issues.

Related papers

• Does More Inference-Time Compute Really Help Robustness? [50.47666612618054]
  We show that small-scale, open-source models can benefit from inference-time scaling.<n>We identify an important security risk, intuitively motivated and empirically verified as an inverse scaling law.<n>We urge practitioners to carefully weigh these subtle trade-offs before applying inference-time scaling in security-sensitive, real-world applications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-21T18:08:38Z)
• ARMOR: Aligning Secure and Safe Large Language Models via Meticulous Reasoning [49.47193675702453]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable generative capabilities.<n>LLMs remain vulnerable to malicious instructions that can bypass safety constraints.<n>We propose a reasoning-based safety alignment framework, ARMOR, that replaces the ad-hoc chains of thought reasoning process with human-aligned, structured one.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-14T09:05:54Z)
• Saffron-1: Safety Inference Scaling [69.61130284742353]
  SAFFRON is a novel inference scaling paradigm tailored explicitly for safety assurance.<n>Central to our approach is the introduction of a multifurcation reward model (MRM) that significantly reduces the required number of reward model evaluations.<n>We publicly release our trained multifurcation reward model (Saffron-1) and the accompanying token-level safety reward dataset (Safety4M)
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-06T18:05:45Z)
• SafeKey: Amplifying Aha-Moment Insights for Safety Reasoning [76.56522719330911]
  Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) introduce a new generation paradigm of explicitly reasoning before answering.<n>LRMs pose great safety risks against harmful queries and adversarial attacks.<n>We propose SafeKey to better activate the safety aha moment in the key sentence.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-22T03:46:03Z)
• Cannot See the Forest for the Trees: Invoking Heuristics and Biases to Elicit Irrational Choices of LLMs [83.11815479874447]
  We propose a novel jailbreak attack framework, inspired by cognitive decomposition and biases in human cognition.<n>We employ cognitive decomposition to reduce the complexity of malicious prompts and relevance bias to reorganize prompts.<n>We also introduce a ranking-based harmfulness evaluation metric that surpasses the traditional binary success-or-failure paradigm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-03T05:28:11Z)
• SafeMLRM: Demystifying Safety in Multi-modal Large Reasoning Models [50.34706204154244]
  Acquiring reasoning capabilities catastrophically degrades inherited safety alignment.<n>Certain scenarios suffer 25 times higher attack rates.<n>Despite tight reasoning-answer safety coupling, MLRMs demonstrate nascent self-correction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-09T06:53:23Z)
• ERPO: Advancing Safety Alignment via Ex-Ante Reasoning Preference Optimization [36.609297811592185]
  Ex-Ante Reasoning Preference Optimization (ERPO) is a novel safety alignment framework for large language models.<n>Our approach consists of three stages: first, equipping the model with Ex-Ante reasoning through supervised fine-tuning (SFT); second, enhancing safety, usefulness, and efficiency via Direct Preference Optimization (DPO); and third, mitigating inference latency with a length-controlled iterative preference optimization strategy.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-03T16:07:38Z)
• Reasoning-to-Defend: Safety-Aware Reasoning Can Defend Large Language Models from Jailbreaking [26.812138599896997]
  We propose Reasoning-to-Defend (R2D), a novel training paradigm that integrates a safety-aware reasoning mechanism into Large Language Models' generation.<n>R2D forms safety pivot tokens as indicators of the safety status of responses.<n>We show that R2D effectively mitigates various attacks and improves overall safety, while maintaining the original performances.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-18T15:48:46Z)
• Turning Logic Against Itself : Probing Model Defenses Through Contrastive Questions [51.51850981481236]
  We introduce POATE, a novel jailbreak technique that harnesses contrastive reasoning to provoke unethical responses.<n>PoATE crafts semantically opposing intents and integrates them with adversarial templates, steering models toward harmful outputs with remarkable subtlety.<n>To counter this, we propose Intent-Aware CoT and Reverse Thinking CoT, which decompose queries to detect malicious intent and reason in reverse to evaluate and reject harmful responses.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-01-03T15:40:03Z)
• Root Defence Strategies: Ensuring Safety of LLM at the Decoding Level [10.476222570886483]
  Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated immense utility across various industries.<n>As LLMs advance, the risk of harmful outputs increases due to incorrect or malicious instruction prompts.<n>This paper examines the LLMs' capability to recognize harmful outputs, revealing and quantifying their proficiency in assessing the danger of previous tokens.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-09T12:09:30Z)

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.