arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
​通知:联邦节假日调休:哥伦布日 / 原住民日(Columbus Day / Indigenous Peoples' Day),今日(13日)无更新。
arXiv 2511.14106cs.CL

隐形微调:通过自动生成的CoT打破RVLMs的对齐

Stealth Fine-Tuning: Efficiently Breaking Alignment in RVLMs Using Self-Generated CoT

Machine Intelligence Laboratory, Sichuan University(四川大学人工智能实验室);University of Wisconsin--Madison(威斯康星大学麦迪逊分校);Department of Automation, Tsinghua University(清华大学自动化系);Global Innovation Exchange, Tsinghua University(清华大学全球创新交流中心)

Le Yu, Zhengyue Zhao, Yawen Zheng, Yunhao Liu

AI总结:

本文提出隐形微调方法,通过分段干扰和自动生成输出,有效绕过RVLMs的安全对齐防御,实现更高的ASR性能同时保持推理能力。

摘要:

增强推理的视觉-语言模型(RVLMs)依赖于安全对齐以防止有害行为,但它们暴露的推理链(CoT)痕迹引入了新的攻击面。在本工作中,我们发现RVLMs的安全对齐可以通过一种新的攻击方法“隐形微调”轻易打破。我们的方法通过分段干扰来激发有害推理痕迹,并重用自动生成的输出作为监督微调数据。为此,我们引入了一种基于回合加权的损失,以最小化分布偏移。在我们的实验中,仅使用499个样本和3小时在单个A100(QLoRA)上训练,隐形微调在ASR上优于IDEATOR 38.66%,同时保持一般推理能力,因为微调后的模型保留了原始表示分布。在AdvBench和多个通用基准测试中的实验表明,隐形微调是一种低成本且高效的绕过对齐防御的方法。免责声明:本文包含可能令人不安或冒犯的内容。

英文摘要:

Reasoning-augmented Vision-Language Models (RVLMs) rely on safety alignment to prevent harmful behavior, yet their exposed chain-of-thought (CoT) traces introduce new attack surfaces. In this work, we find that the safety alignment of RVLMs can be easily broken through a novel attack method termed \textbf{Stealth Fine-Tuning}. Our method elicits harmful reasoning traces through \textbf{segment-level interference} and reuses the self-generated outputs as supervised fine-tuning data. To facilitate this, we introduce a \textbf{turn-based weighted} loss that minimizes distribution shift. In our experiment, with only 499 samples and under 3 hours on a single A100 (QLoRA), Stealth Fine-Tuning outperforms IDEATOR by 38.66\% ASR while preserving general reasoning ability, as the tuned model retains the original representation distribution. Experiments on AdvBench and several general benchmarks demonstrate that Stealth Fine-Tuning is a low-cost and highly effective way to bypass alignment defenses. \textcolor{red}{\textbf{Disclaimer: This paper contains content that may be disturbing or offensive.}}

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑