# Towards Evaluating Proactive Risk Awareness of Multimodal Language Models

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.17455 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.17455/

## Key facts

- Cited by 6 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in MLLM jailbreaks and adversarial robustness, one of 16 directions in Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models.
- Builds on 46 of its 72 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 23 May 2025.

## Placed in

- Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models / [MLLM jailbreaks and adversarial robustness](https://mlsanity.com/mllm/mllm-jailbreaks-and-adversarial-robustness/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 46)

- [Training language models to follow instructions with human feedback](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2203.02155/) (2022)
- [DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.03300/) (2024)
- [Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.15043/) (2023)
- [Jailbroken: How Does LLM Safety Training Fail?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.02483/) (2023)
- [HarmBench: A Standardized Evaluation Framework for Automated Red Teaming and Robust Refusal](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.04249/) (2024)
- [Fine-tuning Aligned Language Models Compromises Safety, Even When Users Do Not Intend To!](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.03693/) (2023)
- [Red Teaming Language Models with Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2202.03286/) (2022)
- [BeaverTails: Towards Improved Safety Alignment of LLM via a Human-Preference Dataset](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.04657/) (2023)
- [Semantic Uncertainty: Linguistic Invariances for Uncertainty Estimation in Natural Language Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2302.09664/) (2023)
- [Red Teaming Language Models to Reduce Harms: Methods, Scaling Behaviors, and Lessons Learned](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2209.07858/) (2022)
- [Identifying the Risks of LM Agents with an LM-Emulated Sandbox](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.15817/) (2023)
- [The WMDP Benchmark: Measuring and Reducing Malicious Use With Unlearning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.03218/) (2024)
- [XSTest: A Test Suite for Identifying Exaggerated Safety Behaviours in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.01263/) (2023)
- [Safety Alignment Should Be Made More Than Just a Few Tokens Deep](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.05946/) (2024)
- [AgentHarm: A Benchmark for Measuring Harmfulness of LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.09024/) (2024)
- [HealthBench: Evaluating Large Language Models Towards Improved Human Health](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.08775/) (2025)
- [GPT-4 Is Too Smart To Be Safe: Stealthy Chat with LLMs via Cipher](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.06463/) (2023)
- [Great, Now Write an Article About That: The Crescendo Multi-Turn LLM Jailbreak Attack](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2404.01833/) (2024)
- [Agent-SafetyBench: Evaluating the Safety of LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.14470/) (2024)
- [R-Judge: Benchmarking Safety Risk Awareness for LLM Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.10019/) (2024)
- [MM-SafetyBench: A Benchmark for Safety Evaluation of Multimodal Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.17600/) (2023)
- [HuatuoGPT, towards Taming Language Model to Be a Doctor](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.15075/) (2023)
- [Prompting and Evaluating Large Language Models for Proactive Dialogues: Clarification, Target-guided, and Non-collaboration](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.13626/) (2023)
- [STaR-GATE: Teaching Language Models to Ask Clarifying Questions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2403.19154/) (2024)
- [SafeArena: Evaluating the Safety of Autonomous Web Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2503.04957/) (2025)
- [ProAgent: Building Proactive Cooperative Agents with Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2308.11339/) (2023)
- [Combating Misinformation in the Age of LLMs: Opportunities and Challenges](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.05656/) (2023)
- [RedCode: Risky Code Execution and Generation Benchmark for Code Agents](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2411.07781/) (2024)
- [Proactive Agent: Shifting LLM Agents from Reactive Responses to Active Assistance](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2410.12361/) (2024)
- [ToolSword: Unveiling Safety Issues of Large Language Models in Tool Learning Across Three Stages](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.10753/) (2024)

## Built on by (most cited first, 6 of 6)

- [HomeGuard: VLM-based Embodied Safeguard for Identifying Contextual Risk in Household Task](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2603.14367/) (2026)
- [When Helpers Become Hazards: A Benchmark for Analyzing Multimodal LLM-Powered Safety in Daily Life](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2601.04043/) (2026)
- [PaSBench-Video: A Streaming Video Benchmark for Proactive Safety Warning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2606.02443/) (2026)
- [Evaluating Proactive Risk Awareness of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2602.20976/) (2026)
- [From Sports to Safety: Benchmarking Proactive Risk Inference in MLLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2608.05560/) (2026)
- [PASTABench: Proactive Assessment of Sequential Trajectories for Agent Safety](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.28197/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Human safety awareness gaps often prevent the timely recognition of everyday risks. In solving this problem, a proactive safety artificial intelligence (AI) system would work better than a reactive one. Instead of just reacting to users' questions, it would actively watch people's behavior and their environment to detect potential dangers in advance. Our Proactive Safety Bench (PaSBench) evaluates this capability through 416 multimodal scenarios (128 image sequences, 288 text logs) spanning 5 safety-critical domains. Evaluation of 36 advanced models reveals fundamental limitations: Top performers like Gemini-2.5-pro achieve 71% image and 64% text accuracy, but miss 45-55% risks in repeated trials. Through failure analysis, we identify unstable proactive reasoning rather than knowledge deficits as the primary limitation. This work establishes (1) a proactive safety benchmark, (2) systematic evidence of model limitations, and (3) critical directions for developing reliable protective AI. We believe our dataset and findings can promote the development of safer AI assistants that actively prevent harm rather than merely respond to requests. Our dataset can be found at https://huggingface.co/datasets/Youliang/PaSBench.