Shaping the Safety Boundaries: Understanding and Defending Against Jailbreaks in Large Language Models

Jailbreaking in Large Language Models (LLMs) is a major security concern as it can deceive LLMs to generate harmful text. Yet, there is still insufficient understanding of how jailbreaking works, which makes it hard to develop effective defense strategies. We aim to shed more light into this issue: we conduct a detailed large-scale analysis of seven different jailbreak methods and find that these disagreements stem from insufficient observation samples. In particular, we introduce \textit{safety boundary}, and we find that jailbreaks shift harmful activations outside that safety boundary, where LLMs are less sensitive to harmful information. We also find that the low and the middle layers are critical in such shifts, while deeper layers have less impact. Leveraging on these insights, we propose a novel defense called \textbf{Activation Boundary Defense} (ABD), which adaptively constrains the activations within the safety boundary. We further use Bayesian optimization to selectively apply the defense method to the low and the middle layers. Our experiments on several benchmarks show that ABD achieves an average DSR of over 98\% against various forms of jailbreak attacks, with less than 2\% impact on the model's general capabilities.

Political-LLM: Large Language Models in Political Science

In recent years, large language models (LLMs) have been widely adopted in political science tasks such as election prediction, sentiment analysis, policy impact assessment, and misinformation detection. Meanwhile, the need to systematically understand how LLMs can further revolutionize the field also becomes urgent. In this work, we--a multidisciplinary team of researchers spanning computer science and political science--present the first principled framework termed Political-LLM to advance the comprehensive understanding of integrating LLMs into computational political science. Specifically, we first introduce a fundamental taxonomy classifying the existing explorations into two perspectives: political science and computational methodologies. In particular, from the political science perspective, we highlight the role of LLMs in automating predictive and generative tasks, simulating behavior dynamics, and improving causal inference through tools like counterfactual generation; from a computational perspective, we introduce advancements in data preparation, fine-tuning, and evaluation methods for LLMs that are tailored to political contexts. We identify key challenges and future directions, emphasizing the development of domain-specific datasets, addressing issues of bias and fairness, incorporating human expertise, and redefining evaluation criteria to align with the unique requirements of computational political science. Political-LLM seeks to serve as a guidebook for researchers to foster an informed, ethical, and impactful use of Artificial Intelligence in political science. Our online resource is available at: http://political-llm.org/.

UOE: Unlearning One Expert Is Enough For Mixture-of-experts LLMS

Recent advancements in large language model (LLM) unlearning have shown remarkable success in removing unwanted data-model influences while preserving the model's utility for legitimate knowledge. However, despite these strides, sparse Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) LLMs--a key subset of the LLM family--have received little attention and remain largely unexplored in the context of unlearning. As MoE LLMs are celebrated for their exceptional performance and highly efficient inference processes, we ask: How can unlearning be performed effectively and efficiently on MoE LLMs? And will traditional unlearning methods be applicable to MoE architectures? Our pilot study shows that the dynamic routing nature of MoE LLMs introduces unique challenges, leading to substantial utility drops when existing unlearning methods are applied. Specifically, unlearning disrupts the router's expert selection, causing significant selection shift from the most unlearning target-related experts to irrelevant ones. As a result, more experts than necessary are affected, leading to excessive forgetting and loss of control over which knowledge is erased. To address this, we propose a novel single-expert unlearning framework, referred to as UOE, for MoE LLMs. Through expert attribution, unlearning is concentrated on the most actively engaged expert for the specified knowledge. Concurrently, an anchor loss is applied to the router to stabilize the active state of this targeted expert, ensuring focused and controlled unlearning that preserves model utility. The proposed UOE framework is also compatible with various unlearning algorithms. Extensive experiments demonstrate that UOE enhances both forget quality up to 5% and model utility by 35% on MoE LLMs across various benchmarks, LLM architectures, while only unlearning 0.06% of the model parameters.

SaSR-Net: Source-Aware Semantic Representation Network for Enhancing Audio-Visual Question Answering

Audio-Visual Question Answering (AVQA) is a challenging task that involves answering questions based on both auditory and visual information in videos. A significant challenge is interpreting complex multi-modal scenes, which include both visual objects and sound sources, and connecting them to the given question. In this paper, we introduce the Source-aware Semantic Representation Network (SaSR-Net), a novel model designed for AVQA. SaSR-Net utilizes source-wise learnable tokens to efficiently capture and align audio-visual elements with the corresponding question. It streamlines the fusion of audio and visual information using spatial and temporal attention mechanisms to identify answers in multi-modal scenes. Extensive experiments on the Music-AVQA and AVQA-Yang datasets show that SaSR-Net outperforms state-of-the-art AVQA methods.

CLIPErase: Efficient Unlearning of Visual-Textual Associations in CLIP

Machine unlearning (MU) has gained significant attention as a means to remove specific data from trained models without requiring a full retraining process. While progress has been made in unimodal domains like text and image classification, unlearning in multimodal models remains relatively underexplored. In this work, we address the unique challenges of unlearning in CLIP, a prominent multimodal model that aligns visual and textual representations. We introduce CLIPErase, a novel approach that disentangles and selectively forgets both visual and textual associations, ensuring that unlearning does not compromise model performance. CLIPErase consists of three key modules: a Forgetting Module that disrupts the associations in the forget set, a Retention Module that preserves performance on the retain set, and a Consistency Module that maintains consistency with the original model. Extensive experiments on the CIFAR-100 and Flickr30K datasets across four CLIP downstream tasks demonstrate that CLIPErase effectively forgets designated associations in zero-shot tasks for multimodal samples, while preserving the model's performance on the retain set after unlearning.

Social Science Meets LLMs: How Reliable Are Large Language Models in Social Simulations?

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly employed for simulations, enabling applications in role-playing agents and Computational Social Science (CSS). However, the reliability of these simulations is under-explored, which raises concerns about the trustworthiness of LLMs in these applications. In this paper, we aim to answer ``How reliable is LLM-based simulation?'' To address this, we introduce TrustSim, an evaluation dataset covering 10 CSS-related topics, to systematically investigate the reliability of the LLM simulation. We conducted experiments on 14 LLMs and found that inconsistencies persist in the LLM-based simulated roles. In addition, the consistency level of LLMs does not strongly correlate with their general performance. To enhance the reliability of LLMs in simulation, we proposed Adaptive Learning Rate Based ORPO (AdaORPO), a reinforcement learning-based algorithm to improve the reliability in simulation across 7 LLMs. Our research provides a foundation for future studies to explore more robust and trustworthy LLM-based simulations.

AutoBench-V: Can Large Vision-Language Models Benchmark Themselves?

Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) have become essential for advancing the integration of visual and linguistic information, facilitating a wide range of complex applications and tasks. However, the evaluation of LVLMs presents significant challenges as the evaluation benchmark always demands lots of human cost for its construction, and remains static, lacking flexibility once constructed. Even though automatic evaluation has been explored in textual modality, the visual modality remains under-explored. As a result, in this work, we address a question: "Can LVLMs serve as a path to automatic benchmarking?". We introduce AutoBench-V, an automated framework for serving evaluation on demand, i.e., benchmarking LVLMs based on specific aspects of model capability. Upon receiving an evaluation capability, AutoBench-V leverages text-to-image models to generate relevant image samples and then utilizes LVLMs to orchestrate visual question-answering (VQA) tasks, completing the evaluation process efficiently and flexibly. Through an extensive evaluation of seven popular LVLMs across five demanded user inputs (i.e., evaluation capabilities), the framework shows effectiveness and reliability. We observe the following: (1) Our constructed benchmark accurately reflects varying task difficulties; (2) As task difficulty rises, the performance gap between models widens; (3) While models exhibit strong performance in abstract level understanding, they underperform in details reasoning tasks; and (4) Constructing a dataset with varying levels of difficulties is critical for a comprehensive and exhaustive evaluation. Overall, AutoBench-V not only successfully utilizes LVLMs for automated benchmarking but also reveals that LVLMs as judges have significant potential in various domains.

Knowledge Graph Enhanced Language Agents for Recommendation

Language agents have recently been used to simulate human behavior and user-item interactions for recommendation systems. However, current language agent simulations do not understand the relationships between users and items, leading to inaccurate user profiles and ineffective recommendations. In this work, we explore the utility of Knowledge Graphs (KGs), which contain extensive and reliable relationships between users and items, for recommendation. Our key insight is that the paths in a KG can capture complex relationships between users and items, eliciting the underlying reasons for user preferences and enriching user profiles. Leveraging this insight, we propose Knowledge Graph Enhanced Language Agents(KGLA), a framework that unifies language agents and KG for recommendation systems. In the simulated recommendation scenario, we position the user and item within the KG and integrate KG paths as natural language descriptions into the simulation. This allows language agents to interact with each other and discover sufficient rationale behind their interactions, making the simulation more accurate and aligned with real-world cases, thus improving recommendation performance. Our experimental results show that KGLA significantly improves recommendation performance (with a 33%-95% boost in NDCG@1 among three widely used benchmarks) compared to the previous best baseline method.

LabSafety Bench: Benchmarking LLMs on Safety Issues in Scientific Labs

Laboratory accidents pose significant risks to human life and property, underscoring the importance of robust safety protocols. Despite advancements in safety training, laboratory personnel may still unknowingly engage in unsafe practices. With the increasing reliance on large language models (LLMs) for guidance in various fields, including laboratory settings, there is a growing concern about their reliability in critical safety-related decision-making. Unlike trained human researchers, LLMs lack formal lab safety education, raising questions about their ability to provide safe and accurate guidance. Existing research on LLM trustworthiness primarily focuses on issues such as ethical compliance, truthfulness, and fairness but fails to fully cover safety-critical real-world applications, like lab safety. To address this gap, we propose the Laboratory Safety Benchmark (LabSafety Bench), a comprehensive evaluation framework based on a new taxonomy aligned with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) protocols. This benchmark includes 765 multiple-choice questions verified by human experts, assessing LLMs and vision language models (VLMs) performance in lab safety contexts. Our evaluations demonstrate that while GPT-4o outperforms human participants, it is still prone to critical errors, highlighting the risks of relying on LLMs in safety-critical environments. Our findings emphasize the need for specialized benchmarks to accurately assess the trustworthiness of LLMs in real-world safety applications.

Improving LLM Reasoning through Scaling Inference Computation with Collaborative Verification

Despite significant advancements in the general capability of large language models (LLMs), they continue to struggle with consistent and accurate reasoning, especially in complex tasks such as mathematical and code reasoning. One key limitation is that LLMs are trained primarily on correct solutions, reducing their ability to detect and learn from errors, which hampers their ability to reliably verify and rank outputs. To address this, we scale up the inference-time computation by generating multiple reasoning paths and employing verifiers to assess and rank the generated outputs by correctness. To facilitate this, we introduce a comprehensive dataset consisting of correct and incorrect solutions for math and code tasks, generated by multiple LLMs. This diverse set of solutions enables verifiers to more effectively distinguish and rank correct answers from erroneous outputs. The training methods for building verifiers were selected based on an extensive comparison of existing approaches. Moreover, to leverage the unique strengths of different reasoning strategies, we propose a novel collaborative method integrating Chain-of-Thought (CoT) and Program-of-Thought (PoT) solutions for verification. CoT provides a clear, step-by-step reasoning process that enhances interpretability, while PoT, being executable, offers a precise and error-sensitive validation mechanism. By taking both of their strengths, our approach significantly improves the accuracy and reliability of reasoning verification. Our verifiers, Math-Rev and Code-Rev, demonstrate substantial performance gains to existing LLMs, achieving state-of-the-art results on benchmarks such as GSM8k and MATH and even outperforming GPT-4o with Qwen-72B-Instruct as the reasoner.