Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Hauptverfasser: Van Doren, Madison, Ford, Casey
Format: Preprint
Veröffentlicht: 2025
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.15478
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
_version_ 1866912723923632128
author Van Doren, Madison
Ford, Casey
author_facet Van Doren, Madison
Ford, Casey
contents Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) are increasingly used in real world applications, yet their safety under adversarial conditions remains underexplored. This study evaluates the harmlessness of four leading MLLMs (GPT-4o, Claude Sonnet 3.5, Pixtral 12B, and Qwen VL Plus) when exposed to adversarial prompts across text-only and multimodal formats. A team of 26 red teamers generated 726 prompts targeting three harm categories: illegal activity, disinformation, and unethical behaviour. These prompts were submitted to each model, and 17 annotators rated 2,904 model outputs for harmfulness using a 5-point scale. Results show significant differences in vulnerability across models and modalities. Pixtral 12B exhibited the highest rate of harmful responses (~62%), while Claude Sonnet 3.5 was the most resistant (~10%). Contrary to expectations, text-only prompts were slightly more effective at bypassing safety mechanisms than multimodal ones. Statistical analysis confirmed that both model type and input modality were significant predictors of harmfulness. These findings underscore the urgent need for robust, multimodal safety benchmarks as MLLMs are deployed more widely.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2509_15478
institution arXiv
publishDate 2025
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Red Teaming Multimodal Language Models: Evaluating Harm Across Prompt Modalities and Models
Van Doren, Madison
Ford, Casey
Computation and Language
Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) are increasingly used in real world applications, yet their safety under adversarial conditions remains underexplored. This study evaluates the harmlessness of four leading MLLMs (GPT-4o, Claude Sonnet 3.5, Pixtral 12B, and Qwen VL Plus) when exposed to adversarial prompts across text-only and multimodal formats. A team of 26 red teamers generated 726 prompts targeting three harm categories: illegal activity, disinformation, and unethical behaviour. These prompts were submitted to each model, and 17 annotators rated 2,904 model outputs for harmfulness using a 5-point scale. Results show significant differences in vulnerability across models and modalities. Pixtral 12B exhibited the highest rate of harmful responses (~62%), while Claude Sonnet 3.5 was the most resistant (~10%). Contrary to expectations, text-only prompts were slightly more effective at bypassing safety mechanisms than multimodal ones. Statistical analysis confirmed that both model type and input modality were significant predictors of harmfulness. These findings underscore the urgent need for robust, multimodal safety benchmarks as MLLMs are deployed more widely.
title Red Teaming Multimodal Language Models: Evaluating Harm Across Prompt Modalities and Models
topic Computation and Language
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.15478