Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

Conflicts Make Large Reasoning Models Vulnerable to Attacks

Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) have achieved remarkable performance across diverse domains, yet their decision-making under conflicting objectives remains insufficiently understood. This work investigates how LRMs respond to harmful queries when confronted with two categories of conflicts: internal conflicts that pit alignment values against each other and dilemmas, which impose mutually contradictory choices, including sacrificial, duress, agent-centered, and social forms. Using over 1,300 prompts across five benchmarks, we evaluate three representative LRMs - Llama-3.1-Nemotron-8B, QwQ-32B, and DeepSeek R1 - and find that conflicts significantly increase attack success rates, even under ...

AuthorsHonghao Liu, Chengjin Xu, Xuhui Jiang et al.
Primary categorycs.CR
Published10 April 2026
Last updated at source10 April 2026
cs.CRcs.AI
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/bdb43c9a-5df1-480a-9c56-640d20440f11" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 17 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.