Xuhui Jiang
Publications
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 single-round non-narrative queries without sophisticated auto-attack techniques. Our findings reveal through layerwise and neuron-level analyses that safety-related and functional representations shift and overlap under conflict, interfering with safety-aligned behavior. This study highlights the need for deeper alignment strategies to ensure the robustness and trustworthiness of next-generation reasoning models. Our code is available at https://github.com/DataArcTech/ConflictHarm. Warning: This paper contains inappropriate, offensive and harmful content.
Towards Knowledgeable Deep Research: Framework and Benchmark
Deep Research (DR) requires LLM agents to autonomously perform multi-step information seeking, processing, and reasoning to generate comprehensive reports. In contrast to existing studies that mainly focus on unstructured web content, a more challenging DR task should additionally utilize structured knowledge to provide a solid data foundation, facilitate quantitative computation, and lead to in-depth analyses. In this paper, we refer to this novel task as Knowledgeable Deep Research (KDR), which requires DR agents to generate reports with both structured and unstructured knowledge. Furthermore, we propose the Hybrid Knowledge Analysis framework (HKA), a multi-agent architecture that reasons over both kinds of knowledge and integrates the texts, figures, and tables into coherent multimodal reports. The key design is the Structured Knowledge Analyzer, which utilizes both coding and vision-language models to produce figures, tables, and corresponding insights. To support systematic evaluation, we construct KDR-Bench, which covers 9 domains, includes 41 expert-level questions, and incorporates a large number of structured knowledge resources (e.g., 1,252 tables). We further annotate the main conclusions and key points for each question and propose three categories of evaluation metrics including general-purpose, knowledge-centric, and vision-enhanced ones. Experimental results demonstrate that HKA consistently outperforms most existing DR agents on general-purpose and knowledge-centric metrics, and even surpasses the Gemini DR agent on vision-enhanced metrics, highlighting its effectiveness in deep, structure-aware knowledge analysis. Finally, we hope this work can serve as a new foundation for structured knowledge analysis in DR agents and facilitate future multimodal DR studies.