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
Related benchmarks
| Task | Dataset | Result | Rank | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Over-refusal | XSTest | -- | 42 | |
| Safety | Beavertails | -- | 32 | |
| Safety Evaluation | WildChat unsafe prompts | Not-Unsafe Rate96.5 | 9 | |
| Jailbreak Robustness | StrongREJECT | Safe Response Rate95.39 | 8 | |
| Utility | MMLU | Accuracy60.52 | 8 | |
| Safety | WildChat | Safe Response Rate94.22 | 2 | |
| Safety Reasoning Evaluation | BeaverTails 5,000 prompts (subsampled) | Relevance4.68 | 2 |