Beyond Content Safety: Real-Time Monitoring for Reasoning Vulnerabilities in Large Language Models
AI 摘要
论文提出推理安全的概念,并设计监控器实时检测LLM推理过程中的错误。
主要贡献
- 定义推理安全,提出九种不安全推理行为的分类
- 大规模实验验证错误类型的普遍性
- 设计基于LLM的推理安全监控器
方法论
通过定义推理安全类型,构建LLM监控器,实时检测推理步骤并分类错误类型。
原文摘要
Large language models (LLMs) increasingly rely on explicit chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning to solve complex tasks, yet the safety of the reasoning process itself remains largely unaddressed. Existing work on LLM safety focuses on content safety--detecting harmful, biased, or factually incorrect outputs -- and treats the reasoning chain as an opaque intermediate artifact. We identify reasoning safety as an orthogonal and equally critical security dimension: the requirement that a model's reasoning trajectory be logically consistent, computationally efficient, and resistant to adversarial manipulation. We make three contributions. First, we formally define reasoning safety and introduce a nine-category taxonomy of unsafe reasoning behaviors, covering input parsing errors, reasoning execution errors, and process management errors. Second, we conduct a large-scale prevalence study annotating 4111 reasoning chains from both natural reasoning benchmarks and four adversarial attack methods (reasoning hijacking and denial-of-service), confirming that all nine error types occur in practice and that each attack induces a mechanistically interpretable signature. Third, we propose a Reasoning Safety Monitor: an external LLM-based component that runs in parallel with the target model, inspects each reasoning step in real time via a taxonomy-embedded prompt, and dispatches an interrupt signal upon detecting unsafe behavior. Evaluation on a 450-chain static benchmark shows that our monitor achieves up to 84.88\% step-level localization accuracy and 85.37\% error-type classification accuracy, outperforming hallucination detectors and process reward model baselines by substantial margins. These results demonstrate that reasoning-level monitoring is both necessary and practically achievable, and establish reasoning safety as a foundational concern for the secure deployment of large reasoning models.