ARES: Adaptive Red-Teaming and End-to-End Repair of Policy-Reward System
On the map: LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation → Safety alignment and jailbreak attacks
also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)
Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) is central to aligning Large Language Models (LLMs), yet it introduces a critical vulnerability: an imperfect Reward Model (RM) can become a single point of failure when it fails to penalize unsafe behaviors. While existing red-teaming approaches primarily target policy-level weaknesses, they overlook what we term systemic weaknesses cases where both the core LLM and the RM fail in tandem. We present ARES, a framework that systematically discovers and mitigates such dual vulnerabilities. ARES employs a ``Safety Mentor'' that dynamically composes semantically coherent adversarial prompts by combining structured component types (topics, personas, tactics, goals) and generates corresponding malicious and safe responses. This dual-targeting approach exposes weaknesses in both the core LLM and the RM simultaneously. Using the vulnerabilities gained, ARES implements a two-stage repair process: first fine-tuning the RM to better detect harmful content, then leveraging the improved RM to optimize the core model. Experiments across multiple adversarial safety benchmarks demonstrate that ARES substantially enhances safety robustness while preserving model capabilities, establishing a new paradigm for comprehensive RLHF safety alignment.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Safety alignment and jailbreak attacks, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation. Builds on 12 of its 59 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 20 Apr 2026.
Builds on
12 of 59 references.
Closest ancestors · 2
Same direction, newest first
- 2024Ferret: Faster and Effective Automated Red Teaming with Reward-Based Scoring Technique20 Aug
- 2024PKU-SafeRLHF: Towards Multi-Level Safety Alignment for LLMs with Human Preference20 Jun
Other references · 10
- 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 10,109
- 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,963
- 2021TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoodscited by 2,975
- 2024HybridFlow: A Flexible and Efficient RLHF Frameworkcited by 2,057
- 2024HarmBench: A Standardized Evaluation Framework for Automated Red Teaming and Robust Refusalcited by 1,429
- 2023MART: Improving LLM Safety with Multi-round Automatic Red-Teamingcited by 163
- 2024ALERT: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Assessing Large Language Models' Safety through Red Teamingcited by 98
- 2023FLIRT: Feedback Loop In-context Red Teamingcited by 83
- 2025A Mousetrap: Fooling Large Reasoning Models for Jailbreak with Chain of Iterative Chaoscited by 43
- 2025OpenAI's Approach to External Red Teaming for AI Models and Systemscited by 28
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Automatic LLM Red Teaming
- 2026Be Your Own Red Teamer: Safety Alignment via Self-Play and Reflective Experience Replay
- 2026CHASE: Adversarial Red-Blue Teaming for Improving LLM Safety using Reinforcement Learning
- 2025Learning-Based Automated Adversarial Red-Teaming for Robustness Evaluation of Large Language Models
- 2026Uncovering Linguistic Fragility in Vision-Language-Action Models via Diversity-Aware Red Teaming
- 2025RedTopic: Toward Topic-Diverse Red Teaming of Large Language Models
- 2026CAGE: A Framework for Culturally Adaptive Red-Teaming Benchmark Generation
- 2024Holistic Automated Red Teaming for Large Language Models through Top-Down Test Case Generation and Multi-turn Interaction