Skip to content
Preprint

When Skills Meet Safety: Benchmarking and Characterizing the Adaptive Jailbreak Robustness of Skill-Merged LLMs

Aug 2026 · 0 citations · 40 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

SkillSafe-Bench is introduced, a controlled benchmark that scores skill-merged models on static refusal, adaptive jailbreak robustness, and capability retention under a conservative two-judge AND rule, and the static effect of merging is base-conditional.

Abstract

Model merging has become the default way to give an aligned language model new skills without retraining: a practitioner folds task vectors from math, code, or domain specialists into a safety-aligned base using task arithmetic, TIES, or DARE. This convenience is known to carry a safety cost, but almost all of that evidence rests on static refusal tests: fixed harmful prompts scored for compliance. We argue this is misleading. Because safety alignment is"shallow,"concentrated in the first few generated tokens, a merged model's static refusal can stay clean while a real adaptive attack still breaks it. We introduce SkillSafe-Bench, a controlled benchmark that scores skill-merged models on static refusal, adaptive jailbreak robustness, and capability retention under a conservative two-judge AND rule. Across six open-weight bases (five families, two scales), static safety does not predict robustness to attack: under a semantic template attack, safe-looking merges on the fragile bases (both Qwen scales and Gemma) are jailbroken 60-76% of the time while others (Llama, Phi-4) stay robust. We further show the static effect of merging is base-conditional, characterize same-recipe abliteration-style safety erosion through a data-free geometric signal (the overlap of a task vector with a safety subspace), and outline SubSafe-Merge, which projects this overlap away to remove that erosion at held capability. Adaptive evaluation is not optional for merged LLMs: the models that most need it look safe under static screening.

View source

Similar papers

Preprint Aug 2026

Benchmarking the Benchmarks: Evaluating Automated Safety Benchmarks for Small Language Models

A large-scale assessment of the effectiveness and robustness of these automated pipelines is conducted by evaluating five widely used benchmark suites across 26 open-source SLMs under a unified judging rubric, which reveals a capability-safety confound that mixes model capability with apparent safety.

Nyamtulla Shaik, Fengjun Li, Bo Luo · 1 citation
Conference Open access 2026

Large Language Model Vulnerabilities

: Large language models are increasingly being deployed in safety-critical domains, yet remain vulnerable to jailbreak attacks that circumvent safety alignments. This systematic review synthesizes empirical jailbreak research published between 2024 and 2025, using a PRISMA-guided search protocol, followed by BERTopic-based topic modeling. The analysis identifies eight main jailbreak categories: optimization-based, ge-netic/evolutionary, iterative refinement, semantic/persuasion-based, decomposition, context/generation-level, visual/encoding and fuzzing attacks, and characterizes their effectiveness, efficiency, and transferability across open-source and proprietary models, including Llama-2/3, Vicuna, GPT-3.5/4, Claude, Gemini, and DeepSeek-V3. Results show that simple configuration and context-level attacks can match the near-perfect attack success rates of sophisticated white-box optimization methods on models such as Llama-2, while requiring far fewer queries and no parameter access, highlighting a gap between research focus and practical threat severity. The review further identifies five recurring vulnerability mechanisms: representation-level gaps, execution-priority manipulation, semantic fragmentation, gradient-space exploitation and persuasion susceptibility, and documents family-specific vulnerability patterns, with open-source Llama-based models consistently more exposed than safety-enhanced architectures such as Claude. Diverse methods, uneven focus on models and publication bias limit how broadly results apply. Nonetheless, the review reveals that weaknesses in safety alignment persist across successive LLM generations, urging that effective defenses must address all eight attack categories rather than isolated techniques.

Meda Račaitytė, Hélder Bastos, R. Ribeiro et al. · 0 citations
Review Aug 2026

SWE-Bench ProMax: Benchmarking Agents on Large-Scale Multilingual Code Refactoring

SWE-Bench ProMax is introduced, an expert-curated, multilingual code refactoring benchmark of 170 instances drawn from real commits across seven programming languages, which presents a meaningful and unsaturated challenge for current AI coding agents.

Yuling Shi, Jingheng Xu, Kelin Fu et al. · 5 citations

Explaining Jailbreaks: Structured and Interpretable Safety Assessment for Large Language Models

This work proposes an explanation-aware safety framework that augments binary harmfulness detection with structured, human-interpretable explanations capturing severity, strategies, trigger spans, ratio-nales, and derived safety factors, and introduces a human–LLM hybrid annotation and canonicaliza-tion pipeline.

Sunghee Dong, Sungwon Yi, Kangmin Bae et al. · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

HiRoute: Hierarchical Routed Prompt Tuning for Safety Alignment of Large Language Models

Experiments across three instruction-tuned models show that HiRoute achieves high safety rates across multiple safety benchmarks while preserving safe-response helpfulness, reducing over-refusal, and maintaining competitive performance on general-purpose tasks.

Fang-Zhou Chen, Shiji Zhao, Mengyan Wang et al. · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.