mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Bidirectional Intention Inference Enhances LLMs' Defense Against Multi-Turn Jailbreak Attacks

arXiv 2509.22732 ↗First posted 25 Sep 2025cs.CR cs.AIcited by 1

On the map: LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation → Safety alignment and jailbreak attacks

also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)

The remarkable capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) have raised significant safety concerns, particularly regarding "jailbreak" attacks that exploit adversarial prompts to bypass safety alignment mechanisms. Existing defense research primarily focuses on single-turn attacks, whereas multi-turn jailbreak attacks progressively break through safeguards through by concealing malicious intent and tactical manipulation, ultimately rendering conventional single-turn defenses ineffective. To address this critical challenge, we propose the Bidirectional Intention Inference Defense (BIID). The method integrates forward request-based intention inference with backward response-based intention retrospection, establishing a bidirectional synergy mechanism to detect risks concealed within seemingly benign inputs, thereby constructing a more robust guardrails that effectively prevents harmful content generation. The proposed method undergoes systematic evaluation compared with a no-defense baseline and seven representative defense methods across three LLMs and two safety benchmarks under 10 different attack methods. Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed method significantly reduces the Attack Success Rate (ASR) across both single-turn and multi-turn jailbreak attempts, outperforming all existing baseline methods while effectively maintaining practical utility. Notably, comparative experiments across three multi-turn safety datasets further validate the proposed model's significant advantages over other defense approaches.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Safety alignment and jailbreak attacks, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation. Builds on 27 of its 39 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Sep 2025.

Builds on

27 of 39 references.

Closest ancestors · 6

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024Defending Large Language Models against Jailbreak Attacks via Semantic Smoothing25 Feb
  2. 2023Safe RLHF: Safe Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback19 Oct
  3. 2023Jailbreak and Guard Aligned Language Models with Only Few In-Context Demonstrations10 Oct
  4. 2023Baseline Defenses for Adversarial Attacks Against Aligned Language Models1 Sep
  5. 2023GPT-4 Is Too Smart To Be Safe: Stealthy Chat with LLMs via Cipher12 Aug
  6. 2023Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Models27 Jul

Other references · 21

  1. 2024DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Modelscited by 9,379
  2. 2025Qwen3 Technical Reportcited by 8,820
  3. 2022Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasonerscited by 4,374
  4. 2022Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 3,720
  5. 2023Jailbroken: How Does LLM Safety Training Fail?cited by 1,651
  6. 2024HarmBench: A Standardized Evaluation Framework for Automated Red Teaming and Robust Refusalcited by 1,429
  7. 2023Jailbreaking Black Box Large Language Models in Twenty Queriescited by 1,420
  8. 2024Length-Controlled AlpacaEval: A Simple Way to Debias Automatic Evaluatorscited by 897
  9. 2023MAmmoTH: Building Math Generalist Models through Hybrid Instruction Tuningcited by 487
  10. 2024Jailbreaking Leading Safety-Aligned LLMs with Simple Adaptive Attackscited by 486
  11. 2023Multi-step Jailbreaking Privacy Attacks on ChatGPTcited by 333
  12. 2023LLM Self Defense: By Self Examination, LLMs Know They Are Being Trickedcited by 244
9 more
  1. 2024Jailbreak Attacks and Defenses Against Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 230
  2. 2024Security and Privacy Challenges of Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 186
  3. 2024Robust Prompt Optimization for Defending Language Models Against Jailbreaking Attackscited by 156
  4. 2024LLM Defenses Are Not Robust to Multi-Turn Human Jailbreaks Yetcited by 151
  5. 2025X-Teaming: Multi-Turn Jailbreaks and Defenses with Adaptive Multi-Agentscited by 125
  6. 2024LLMs know their vulnerabilities: Uncover Safety Gaps through Natural Distribution Shiftscited by 86
  7. 2024Does Refusal Training in LLMs Generalize to the Past Tense?cited by 79
  8. 2024Defending LLMs against Jailbreaking Attacks via Backtranslationcited by 70
  9. 2024CoSafe: Evaluating Large Language Model Safety in Multi-Turn Dialogue Coreferencecited by 51

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2024Jailbreaking? One Step Is Enough!
  2. 2024Intention Analysis Makes LLMs A Good Jailbreak Defender
  3. 2025SAID: Safety-Aware Intent Defense via Prefix Probing for Large Language Models
  4. 2026SoK: Intent-Oriented Systematization of Multi-Turn LLM Jailbreaks
  5. 2025Mitigating Jailbreaks with Intent-Aware LLMs
  6. 2026THRD: A Training-Free Multi-Turn Defense Framework for Jailbreak Attacks on Large Language Models
  7. 2026Reactivating Alignment: Defending LLMs from Jailbreaks via Intention-Aware Input-Output Matching
  8. 2026Verifying Intent and Harm: A Unified Defense Against LLM-Generated Threats