Benchmarking Safety Risks of Knowledge-Intensive Reasoning under Malicious Knowledge Editing
Fuente:
arXiv
Gespeichert in:
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Preprint |
| Veröffentlicht: |
2026
|
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| _version_ | 1866911670752772096 |
|---|---|
| author | Mao, Qinghua Lin, Xi Gu, Jinze Wu, Jun Li, Siyuan Chen, Yuliang |
| author_facet | Mao, Qinghua Lin, Xi Gu, Jinze Wu, Jun Li, Siyuan Chen, Yuliang |
| contents | Large language models (LLMs) increasingly rely on knowledge editing to support knowledge-intensive reasoning, but this flexibility also introduces critical safety risks: adversaries can inject malicious or misleading knowledge that corrupts downstream reasoning and leads to harmful outcomes. Existing knowledge editing benchmarks primarily focus on editing efficacy and lack a unified framework for systematically evaluating the safety implications of edited knowledge on reasoning behavior. To address this gap, we present EditRisk-Bench, a benchmark for systematically evaluating safety risks of knowledge-intensive reasoning under malicious knowledge editing. Unlike prior benchmarks that mainly emphasize edit success, generalization, and locality, EditRisk-Bench focuses on how injected knowledge affects downstream reasoning behavior and reliability. It integrates diverse malicious scenarios, including misinformation, bias, and safety violations, together with multi-level knowledge-intensive reasoning tasks and representative editing strategies within a unified evaluation framework measuring attack effectiveness, reasoning correctness, and side effects. Extensive experiments on both open-source and closed-source LLMs show that malicious knowledge editing can reliably induce incorrect or unsafe reasoning while largely preserving general capabilities, making such risks difficult to detect. We further identify several key factors influencing these risks, including edit scale, knowledge characteristics, and reasoning complexity. EditRisk-Bench provides an extensible testbed for understanding and mitigating safety risks in knowledge editing for LLMs. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2605_10146 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Benchmarking Safety Risks of Knowledge-Intensive Reasoning under Malicious Knowledge Editing Mao, Qinghua Lin, Xi Gu, Jinze Wu, Jun Li, Siyuan Chen, Yuliang Artificial Intelligence Cryptography and Security Large language models (LLMs) increasingly rely on knowledge editing to support knowledge-intensive reasoning, but this flexibility also introduces critical safety risks: adversaries can inject malicious or misleading knowledge that corrupts downstream reasoning and leads to harmful outcomes. Existing knowledge editing benchmarks primarily focus on editing efficacy and lack a unified framework for systematically evaluating the safety implications of edited knowledge on reasoning behavior. To address this gap, we present EditRisk-Bench, a benchmark for systematically evaluating safety risks of knowledge-intensive reasoning under malicious knowledge editing. Unlike prior benchmarks that mainly emphasize edit success, generalization, and locality, EditRisk-Bench focuses on how injected knowledge affects downstream reasoning behavior and reliability. It integrates diverse malicious scenarios, including misinformation, bias, and safety violations, together with multi-level knowledge-intensive reasoning tasks and representative editing strategies within a unified evaluation framework measuring attack effectiveness, reasoning correctness, and side effects. Extensive experiments on both open-source and closed-source LLMs show that malicious knowledge editing can reliably induce incorrect or unsafe reasoning while largely preserving general capabilities, making such risks difficult to detect. We further identify several key factors influencing these risks, including edit scale, knowledge characteristics, and reasoning complexity. EditRisk-Bench provides an extensible testbed for understanding and mitigating safety risks in knowledge editing for LLMs. |
| title | Benchmarking Safety Risks of Knowledge-Intensive Reasoning under Malicious Knowledge Editing |
| topic | Artificial Intelligence Cryptography and Security |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.10146 |