Our new X account is live! Follow @wizwand_team for updates
WorkDL logo mark

Towards Safety Reasoning in LLMs: AI-agentic Deliberation for Policy-embedded CoT Data Creation

About

Safety reasoning is a recent paradigm where LLMs reason over safety policies before generating responses, thereby mitigating limitations in existing safety measures such as over-refusal and jailbreak vulnerabilities. However, implementing this paradigm is challenging due to the resource-intensive process of creating high-quality policy-embedded chain-of-thought (CoT) datasets while ensuring reasoning remains accurate and free from hallucinations or policy conflicts. To tackle this, we propose AIDSAFE: Agentic Iterative Deliberation for Safety Reasoning, a novel data generation recipe that leverages multi-agent deliberation to iteratively expand reasoning on safety policies. A data refiner stage in AIDSAFE ensures high-quality outputs by eliminating repetitive, redundant, and deceptive thoughts. AIDSAFE-generated CoTs provide a strong foundation for supervised fine-tuning (SFT)-based safety training. Additionally, to address the need of preference data in alignment stages, such as DPO training, we introduce a supplemental recipe that uses belief augmentation to create distinct selected and rejected CoT samples. Our evaluations demonstrate that AIDSAFE-generated CoTs achieve superior policy adherence and reasoning quality. Consequently, we show that fine-tuning open-source LLMs on these CoTs can significantly improve safety generalization and jailbreak robustness while maintaining acceptable utility and over-refusal accuracy. AIDSAFE-generated CoT datasets can be found here: https://huggingface.co/datasets/AmazonScience/AIDSAFE

Tharindu Kumarage, Ninareh Mehrabi, Anil Ramakrishna, Xinyan Zhao, Richard Zemel, Kai-Wei Chang, Aram Galstyan, Rahul Gupta, Charith Peris• 2025

Related benchmarks

TaskDatasetResultRank
Over-refusalXSTest--
42
SafetyBeavertails--
32
Safety EvaluationWildChat unsafe prompts
Not-Unsafe Rate96.5
9
Jailbreak RobustnessStrongREJECT
Safe Response Rate95.39
8
UtilityMMLU
Accuracy60.52
8
SafetyWildChat
Safe Response Rate94.22
2
Safety Reasoning EvaluationBeaverTails 5,000 prompts (subsampled)
Relevance4.68
2
Showing 7 of 7 rows

Other info

Follow for update