arXiv (All)
open access
Same Outcome, Different Evidence: Intent Recovery in LLM Safety Evaluation
Safety evaluations of large language models commonly summarize harmful-output behavior with attack success rate (ASR). Yet the same non-harmful outcome can arise for very different reasons. A model may recover a harmful task and refuse it, fail to recover the task, or respond to something else entir
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- SafeEvo: Deciphering the Safety Alignment Mechanism and Evolution in Language Models#1233968
- The Unreliable Progress Bar: Can LLM Agents Reliably Report Task Progress Throughout Execution?#985929
- RLHF as Conditioning: Doctrinal Templates, Narrative Selfhood Engineering, and the Subject Position in Safety-Trained Language Models#689540
- Beyond Routine Compliance: Cunning Data Cultivates Safety Vigilance in Large Language Models#1012696
- A$^2$Safe: Counterfactual Evidence-Aligned Adaptive Agent Collaboration for Safe and Effective Visual Question Answering#1050284
Record · ID 1249046
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive