mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Safety in Batches? Understanding and Mitigating Safety Failures in Batch Prompting

arXiv 2608.02681 ↗First posted 3 Aug 2026cs.CRcited by 0

On the map: LLM safety and security → Safety alignment, refusal and guardrails

Abstract (arXiv)

Batch prompting is a practical inference strategy for large language models, but its safety implications remain underexplored. We show that the success of batch prompting for utility does not extend to safety: a harmful question that is reliably refused in isolation can elicit a harmful response when embedded in a batch of benign questions. We identify this as a distinct safety failure mode -- not reducible to known vulnerabilities such as in-context learning or long-context effects -- and analyze its causes from two complementary perspectives: alignment signal weakening and refusal signal dilution. Across widely used open-source and frontier commercial models, batch prompting consistently achieves high attack success rates as a simple black-box attack. We further show that batch-aware preference optimization effectively mitigates the vulnerability. These findings highlight a blind spot in current safety alignment and point to batch-aware alignment as a necessary step toward robust deployment. Code is available at https://github.com/96kihyun/batch_jailbreak

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Safety alignment, refusal and guardrails, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. First posted on arXiv 3 Aug 2026.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026A Paired Testing Protocol for Batch-Conditioned Refusal Robustness in LLM Serving
  2. 2025Efficient but Vulnerable: Benchmarking and Defending LLM Batch Prompting Attack
  3. 2025Reasoned Safety Alignment: Ensuring Jailbreak Defense via Answer-Then-Check
  4. 2026When Choices Become Risks: Safety Failures of Large Language Models under Multiple-Choice Constraints
  5. 2025SAID: Safety-Aware Intent Defense via Prefix Probing for Large Language Models
  6. 2026Safety Paradox: How Enhanced Safety Awareness Leaves LLMs Vulnerable to Posterior Attack
  7. 2026Deactivating Refusal Triggers: Understanding and Mitigating Overrefusal in Safety Alignment
  8. 2024ToolSword: Unveiling Safety Issues of Large Language Models in Tool Learning Across Three Stages