arXiv:2611.07482v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) have achieved impressive performance via explicit Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning, yet this process introduces critical safety risks. We formalize LRM safety objectives as requiring non-malicious reasoning and answers, safety consistency, and explicit intent identification. We argue that existing alignment methods suffer from poor adversarial generalization, a significant ``safety tax'' on reasoning, and unfaithful coarse-grained rewards, primarily due to their neglect of the LRM's intrinsic reasoning capabilities for safety. To address these, we propose \textbf{SAVeR$^2$}, a novel \textbf{S}afety \textbf{A}lignment method via \textbf{R}ewards with \textbf{R}easoning capability.
Artificial Intelligence · 2026-11-06
SAVeR$^2$: Reasoning-based Safety Alignment for Large Reasoning Models via Verifiable Rewards
arXiv:2611.07482v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) have achieved impressive performance via explicit Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning, yet this process introduces critical safety risks. We formalize LRM safety objectives as requiring non-malicious reasoning and answers, safety consistency, and explicit intent identification.
Source and attribution
This is an attributed editorial digest. For the complete study and original reporting, follow the source link.
Reader feedback
0 likes · 0 dislikes