Cross-Generational Transfer of Adversarial Attacks Reveals Non-Monotonic Safety Alignment in LLMs
On the map: LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation → Safety alignment and jailbreak attacks
also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)
Safety alignment in LLMs does not improve monotonically across model generations. Studying four generations of Google's Gemma family (7B-31B) with quality-diversity evolution (MAP-Elites) as an automated red-teaming probe, we find that Gemma 3 (12B) exhibits 68.7% +/- 5.7% attack success rate (ASR; mean +/- std, 3 seeds), significantly higher than its predecessor Gemma 2 (45.5% +/- 7.2%; p = 0.030, paired bootstrap) and its successor Gemma 4 (33.9% +/- 1.8%). Replaying evolved attack archives across generations reveals that attacks from other generations transfer to Gemma 3 at 44-46% but only 14-18% to Gemma 4, indicating that Gemma 4's safety gains generalize beyond the attack distributions evolved against earlier generations. Under our 8B judge, copyright and cybercrime vulnerabilities register at near-100% across all generations, though a second-judge audit (Section 6) suggests the copyright result is sensitive to judge choice. Misinformation ASR jumps from 29% to 99% between Gemma 2 and Gemma 3 and remains elevated at 77% in Gemma 4, indicating the regression was not fully addressed. These patterns are invisible to static benchmarks and emerge only through adaptive, longitudinal probing. All experiments use 3 random seeds with a unified self-hosted judge; code and artifacts are available at https://github.com/bassrehab/red-queen.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Safety alignment and jailbreak attacks, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation. Builds on 9 of its 12 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 May 2026.
Builds on
9 of 12 references.
Closest ancestors · 2
Same direction, newest first
- 2023AutoDAN: Generating Stealthy Jailbreak Prompts on Aligned Large Language Models3 Oct
- 2023Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Models27 Jul
Other references · 7
- 2020Scaling Laws for Neural Language Modelscited by 6,411
- 2022Training Compute-Optimal Large Language Modelscited by 2,927
- 2024HarmBench: A Standardized Evaluation Framework for Automated Red Teaming and Robust Refusalcited by 1,330
- 2023Jailbreaking Black Box Large Language Models in Twenty Queriescited by 1,326
- 2015Illuminating search spaces by mapping elitescited by 406
- 2014Robots that can adapt like animalscited by 203
- 2019Covariance Matrix Adaptation for the Rapid Illumination of Behavior Spacecited by 78
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Adversarial Attack-Defense Co-Evolution for LLM Safety Alignment via Tree-Group Dual-Aware Search and Optimization
- 2026Safety Is Not Universal: The Selective Safety Trap in LLM Alignment
- 2026Into the Gray Zone: Domain Contexts Can Blur LLM Safety Boundaries
- 2026Co-Evolutionary Multi-Modal Alignment via Structured Adversarial Evolution
- 2025Adversarial Alignment for LLMs Requires Simpler, Reproducible, and More Measurable Objectives
- 2024Safety Alignment Should Be Made More Than Just a Few Tokens Deep
- 2025Lifelong Safety Alignment for Language Models
- 2026When Safe Models Merge into Danger: Exploiting Latent Vulnerabilities in LLM Fusion