# Conflicts Make Large Reasoning Models Vulnerable to Attacks

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.09750 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2604.09750/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Placed in Reasoning for agents, planning and code, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning.
- Builds on 33 of its 35 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 10 Apr 2026.

## Placed in

- LLM reasoning / [Reasoning for agents, planning and code](https://mlsanity.com/lr/reasoning-for-agents-planning-and-code/)

## Builds on (most cited first, 30 of 33)

- [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)
- [Jailbreaking Black Box Large Language Models in Twenty Queries](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.08419/) (2023)
- [Llama Guard: LLM-based Input-Output Safeguard for Human-AI Conversations](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2312.06674/) (2023)
- [Fine-tuning Aligned Language Models Compromises Safety, Even When Users Do Not Intend To!](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.03693/) (2023)
- [Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.05782/) (2023)
- [How Johnny Can Persuade LLMs to Jailbreak Them: Rethinking Persuasion to Challenge AI Safety by Humanizing LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.06373/) (2024)
- [Catastrophic Jailbreak of Open-source LLMs via Exploiting Generation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2310.06987/) (2023)
- [DeepInception: Hypnotize Large Language Model to Be Jailbreaker](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.03191/) (2023)
- [Toxicity in ChatGPT: Analyzing Persona-assigned Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2304.05335/) (2023)
- [Jailbreak in pieces: Compositional Adversarial Attacks on Multi-Modal Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.14539/) (2023)
- [Assessing the Brittleness of Safety Alignment via Pruning and Low-Rank Modifications](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2402.05162/) (2024)
- [Evaluating the Moral Beliefs Encoded in LLMs](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2307.14324/) (2023)
- [Scalable and Transferable Black-Box Jailbreaks for Language Models via Persona Modulation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2311.03348/) (2023)
- [On Second Thought, Let's Not Think Step by Step! Bias and Toxicity in Zero-Shot Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.08061/) (2022)
- [Free Process Rewards without Process Labels](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.01981/) (2024)
- [SafeChain: Safety of Language Models with Long Chain-of-Thought Reasoning Capabilities](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.12025/) (2025)
- [Safety Layers in Aligned Large Language Models: The Key to LLM Security](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.17003/) (2024)
- [Forest-of-Thought: Scaling Test-Time Compute for Enhancing LLM Reasoning](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2412.09078/) (2024)
- [H-CoT: Hijacking the Chain-of-Thought Safety Reasoning Mechanism to Jailbreak Large Reasoning Models, Including OpenAI o1/o3, DeepSeek-R1, and Gemini 2.0 Flash Thinking](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.12893/) (2025)
- [The Benefits of a Concise Chain of Thought on Problem-Solving in Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2401.05618/) (2024)
- [Language Model Alignment in Multilingual Trolley Problems](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2407.02273/) (2024)
- [A Mousetrap: Fooling Large Reasoning Models for Jailbreak with Chain of Iterative Chaos](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.15806/) (2025)
- [Probing the Moral Development of Large Language Models through Defining Issues Test](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2309.13356/) (2023)
- [Will Systems of LLM Agents Cooperate: An Investigation into a Social Dilemma](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.16173/) (2025)
- [Mix Data or Merge Models? Balancing the Helpfulness, Honesty, and Harmlessness of Large Language Model via Model Merging](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2502.06876/) (2025)
- [Are Large Language Models More Empathetic than Humans?](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2406.05063/) (2024)
- [LLMs are Vulnerable to Malicious Prompts Disguised as Scientific Language](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2501.14073/) (2025)
- [Exploring and steering the moral compass of Large Language Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2405.17345/) (2024)
- [Bullying the Machine: How Personas Increase LLM Vulnerability](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2505.12692/) (2025)

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Alignment of LRMs via Counter-Aligned Few-Shot Conversation Exposure](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2609.27763/) (2026)

## Abstract (arXiv)

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.