Han Zhu

Han Zhu, Jiale Chen, Chengkun Cai et al.

Multi-modal Large Language Models (MLLMs) are increasingly deployed in interactive applications. However, their safety vulnerabilities become pronounced in multi-turn multi-modal scenarios, where harmful intent can be gradually reconstructed across turns, and security protocols fade into oblivion as the conversation progresses. Existing Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) alignment methods are largely developed for single-turn visual question-answer (VQA) task and often require costly manual preference annotations, limiting their effectiveness and scalability in dialogues. To address this challenge, we present InterSafe-V, an open-source multi-modal dialogue dataset containing 11,270 dialogues and 500 specially designed refusal VQA samples. This dataset, constructed through interaction between several models, is designed to more accurately reflect real-world scenarios and includes specialized VQA pairs tailored for specific domains. Building on this dataset, we propose AM$^3$Safety, a framework that combines a cold-start refusal phase with Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) fine-tuning using turn-aware dual-objective rewards across entire dialogues. Experiments on Qwen2.5-VL-7B-Instruct and LLaVA-NeXT-7B show more than 10\% decrease in Attack Success Rate (ASR) together with an increment of at least 8\% in harmless dimension and over 13\% in helpful dimension of MLLMs on multi-modal multi-turn safety benchmarks, while preserving their general abilities.

Yujin Zhou, Pengcheng Wen, Jiale Chen et al.

The rapid advancement of Large Vision Language Models (LVLMs) has demonstrated excellent abilities in various visual tasks. Building upon these developments, the thinking with images paradigm has emerged, enabling models to dynamically edit and re-encode visual information at each reasoning step, mirroring human visual processing. However, this paradigm introduces significant challenges as diverse errors may occur during reasoning processes. This necessitates Process Reward Models (PRMs) for distinguishing positive and negative reasoning steps, yet existing benchmarks for PRMs are predominantly text-centric and lack comprehensive assessment under this paradigm. To address these gaps, this work introduces the first comprehensive benchmark specifically designed for evaluating PRMs under the thinking with images paradigm. Our main contributions are: (1) Through extensive analysis of reasoning trajectories and guided search experiments with PRMs, we define 7 fine-grained error types and demonstrate both the necessity for specialized PRMs and the potential for improvement. (2) We construct a comprehensive benchmark comprising 1,206 manually annotated thinking with images reasoning trajectories spanning 4 categories and 16 subcategories for fine-grained evaluation of PRMs. (3) Our experimental analysis reveals that current LVLMs fall short as effective PRMs, exhibiting limited capabilities in visual reasoning process evaluation with significant performance disparities across error types, positive evaluation bias, and sensitivity to reasoning step positions. These findings demonstrate the effectiveness of our benchmark and establish crucial foundations for advancing PRMs in LVLMs.