mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Can Vision-Language Models Stay Helpful When Facing Implicit Risks? Intent-Privilege OPSD for Efficient Safety-Helpfulness Alignment

arXiv 2609.37837 ↗First posted 29 Sep 2026cs.CLcited by 0

On the map: Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models → MLLM jailbreaks and adversarial robustness

also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)

Vision-Language Models (VLMs) remain vulnerable to cross-modal implicit risks: visual and textual inputs that appear benign in isolation can jointly elicit unsafe responses. Existing safety methods often require large preference datasets, costly multi-rollout training, or additional safeguards at inference time. They may also sacrifice helpfulness by directly refusing requests that could be answered safely. In this paper, we propose Intent-Privilege On-Policy Self-Distillation (OPSD), which leverages evidence-grounded intent as privileged supervision during training to help VLMs recognize implicit risks and provide safe, useful responses instead of blanket refusals. OPSD distills a teacher's intent-conditioned preferences over responses into a student using a single rollout per prompt; the student then responds without intent annotations or an additional safety module. With only 1,447 safety-specific examples - 95% fewer than standard preference datasets - OPSD reduces training time by 5x relative to multi-rollout GRPO-style training and average inference length by 7%. It attains the highest ratio for joint safety-helpfulness success, which measures the proportion of responses that are both safe and helpful, across all five evaluation groups. Remarkably, on pooled SIUO+HoliSafe, this success ratio rises from 43.9% to 53.5%. These results show that training-time intent supervision can improve both safety and helpfulness while substantially reducing data, training, and inference costs.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in MLLM jailbreaks and adversarial robustness, one of 16 directions in Multimodal LLMs / vision-language models. Builds on 31 of its 34 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Sep 2026.

Builds on

31 of 34 references.

Closest ancestors · 18

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2026Safe responses matter: Output-aware safety guardrail mitigate over-refusal in MLLMs20 Jun
  2. 2026Pragma-VL: Towards a Pragmatic Arbitration of Safety and Helpfulness in MLLMs28 Feb
  3. 2025SafeGRPO: Self-Rewarded Multimodal Safety Alignment via Rule-Governed Policy Optimization17 Nov
  4. 2025CrossGuard: Safeguarding MLLMs against Joint-Modal Implicit Malicious Attacks20 Oct
  5. 2025SIA: Enhancing Safety via Intent Awareness for Vision-Language Models21 Jul
  6. 2025HoliSafe: Holistic Safety Benchmarking and Modeling for Vision-Language Model5 Jun
  7. 2025DREAM: Disentangling Risks to Enhance Safety Alignment in Multimodal Large Language Models25 Apr
  8. 2025VLMGuard-R1: Proactive Safety Alignment for VLMs via Reasoning-Driven Prompt Optimization17 Apr
  9. 2025Safe RLHF-V: Safe Reinforcement Learning from Multi-modal Human Feedback22 Mar
  10. 2024Cross-Modal Safety Mechanism Transfer in Large Vision-Language Models16 Oct
  11. 2024Multimodal Situational Safety8 Oct
  12. 2024MOSSBench: Is Your Multimodal Language Model Oversensitive to Safe Queries?22 Jun
6 more
  1. 2024Safe Inputs but Unsafe Output: Benchmarking Cross-modality Safety Alignment of Large Vision-Language Model21 Jun
  2. 2024SPA-VL: A Comprehensive Safety Preference Alignment Dataset for Vision Language Model17 Jun
  3. 2024Safety Alignment for Vision Language Models22 May
  4. 2023MM-SafetyBench: A Benchmark for Safety Evaluation of Multimodal Large Language Models29 Nov
  5. 2023FigStep: Jailbreaking Large Vision-Language Models via Typographic Visual Prompts9 Nov
  6. 2023Jailbreak in pieces: Compositional Adversarial Attacks on Multi-Modal Language Models26 Jul

Other references · 13

  1. 2015Distilling the Knowledge in a Neural Networkcited by 10,076
  2. 2024DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Modelscited by 8,851
  3. 2023Visual Instruction Tuningcited by 7,792
  4. 2023BLIP-2: Bootstrapping Language-Image Pre-training with Frozen Image Encoders and Large Language Modelscited by 6,069
  5. 2023On-Policy Distillation of Language Models: Learning from Self-Generated Mistakescited by 840
  6. 2026Self-Distilled Reasoner: On-Policy Self-Distillation for Large Language Modelscited by 386
  7. 2024Safety Fine-Tuning at (Almost) No Cost: A Baseline for Vision Large Language Modelscited by 160
  8. 2022Learning by Distilling Contextcited by 128
  9. 2023A Survey of Safety and Trustworthiness of Large Language Models through the Lens of Verification and Validationcited by 91
  10. 2023Adventures of Trustworthy Vision-Language Models: A Surveycited by 10
  11. 2025SGuard-v1: Safety Guardrail for Large Language Modelscited by 3
  12. 2026CASA: Classification Augmented with Safety Attention for Robust Multimodal Alignmentcited by 2
1 more
  1. 2026MMAligner: Safeguarding Multimodal Large Language Models through Representation Calibrationcited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Self-Aware Safety Augmentation: Leveraging Internal Semantic Understanding to Enhance Safety in Vision-Language Models
  2. 2024ETA: Evaluating Then Aligning Safety of Vision Language Models at Inference Time
  3. 2026When Safety Overrides Vision: Exploring Dynamics between Vision Influence and Safety Alignment in Vision-Language Models
  4. 2026EviSafe: Evidence-Grounded Safety Evaluation for Vision-Language Models
  5. 2025Think-Reflect-Revise: A Policy-Guided Reflective Framework for Safety Alignment in Large Vision Language Models
  6. 2026Visual Grounding Safety in Vision-Language Models
  7. 2026Concept-Based Dictionary Learning for Inference-Time Safety in Vision Language Action Models
  8. 2025The Safety Reminder: A Soft Prompt to Reactivate Delayed Safety Awareness in Vision-Language Models