Vision-language models (VLMs) aligned with general human objectives, such as being harmless and hallucination-free, have become valuable assistants of humans in managing visual tasks. However, people with diversified backgrounds have different cognition even in the same situation. Consequently, they may have personalized expectations for VLM assistants. This highlights the urgent need to align VLM assistants with personalized situated cognition for real-world assistance. To study this problem, we first simplify it by characterizing individuals based on the sociological concept of Role-Set. Then, we propose to evaluate the individuals’ actions to examine whether the personalized alignment is achieved. Further, we construct a benchmark named PCogAlignBench, which includes 18k instances and 20 individuals with different Role-Sets. Finally, we present a framework called PCogAlign, which constructs a cognition-aware and action-based reward model for personalized alignment. Experimental results and human evaluations demonstrate the reliability of the PCogAlignBench and the effectiveness of our proposed PCogAlign. We will open-source the constructed benchmark and code after being accepted.

Security alignment enables the Large Language Model (LLM) to gain the protection against malicious queries, but various jailbreak attack methods reveal the vulnerability of this security mechanism. Previous studies have isolated LLM jailbreak attacks and defenses. We analyze the security protection mechanism of the LLM, and propose a framework that combines attack and defense. Our method is based on the linearly separable property of LLM intermediate layer embedding, as well as the essence of jailbreak attack, which aims to embed harmful problems and transfer them to the safe area. We utilize generative adversarial network (GAN) to learn the security judgment boundary inside the LLM to achieve efficient jailbreak attack and defense. The experimental results indicate that our method achieves an average jailbreak success rate of 88.85% across three popular LLMs, while the defense success rate on the state-of-the-art jailbreak dataset reaches an average of 84.17%. This not only validates the effectiveness of our approach but also sheds light on the internal security mechanisms of LLMs, offering new insights for enhancing model security.Warning: This paper contains some harmful text examples.

Large language models (LLMs) have shown excellent capability for solving reasoning problems. Existing approaches do not differentiate the question difficulty when designing prompting methods for them. Clearly, a simple method cannot elicit sufficient knowledge from LLMs to answer a hard question. Meanwhile, a sophisticated one will force the LLM to generate redundant or even inaccurate intermediate steps toward a simple question. Consequently, the performance of existing methods fluctuates among various questions.In this work, we propose Adaption-of-Thought (AdoT), an adaptive method to improve LLMs for the reasoning problem, which first measures the question difficulty and then tailors demonstration set construction and difficulty-adapted retrieval strategies for the adaptive demonstration construction. Experimental results on three reasoning tasks prove the superiority of our proposed method, showing an absolute improvement of up to 5.5% on arithmetic reasoning, 7.4% on symbolic reasoning, and 2.3% on commonsense reasoning. Our codes and implementation details are available at: https://github.com/NLPGM/AdoT

Large language models (LLMs) have made remarkable progress in a wide range of natural language understanding and generation tasks. However, their ability to generate counterfactuals has not been examined systematically. To bridge this gap, we present a comprehensive evaluation framework on various types of NLU tasks, which covers all key factors in determining LLMs’ capability of generating counterfactuals. Based on this framework, we 1) investigate the strengths and weaknesses of LLMs as the counterfactual generator, and 2) disclose the factors that affect LLMs when generating counterfactuals, including both the intrinsic properties of LLMs and prompt designing. The results show that, though LLMs are promising in most cases, they face challenges in complex tasks like RE since they are bounded by task-specific performance, entity constraints, and inherent selection bias. We also find that alignment techniques, e.g., instruction-tuning and reinforcement learning from human feedback, may potentially enhance the counterfactual generation ability of LLMs. On the contrary, simply increasing the parameter size does not yield the desired improvements. Besides, from the perspective of prompt designing, task guidelines unsurprisingly play an important role. However, the chain-of-thought approach does not always help due to inconsistency issues.