SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2507.18576

SafeWork-R1: Coevolving Safety and Intelligence under the AI-45$^{\circ}$ Law

Abstract

We introduce SafeWork-R1, a cutting-edge multimodal reasoning model that demonstrates the coevolution of capabilities and safety. It is developed by our proposed SafeLadder framework, which incorporates large-scale, progressive, safety-oriented reinforcement learning post-training, supported by a suite of multi-principled verifiers. Unlike previous alignment methods such as RLHF that simply learn human preferences, SafeLadder enables SafeWork-R1 to develop intrinsic safety reasoning and self-reflection abilities, giving rise to safety `aha' moments. Notably, SafeWork-R1 achieves an average improvement of $46.54\%$ over its base model Qwen2.5-VL-72B on safety-related benchmarks without compromising general capabilities, and delivers state-of-the-art safety performance compared to leading proprietary models such as GPT-4.1 and Claude Opus 4. To further bolster its reliability, we implement two distinct inference-time intervention methods and a deliberative search mechanism, enforcing step-level verification. Finally, we further develop SafeWork-R1-InternVL3-78B, SafeWork-R1-DeepSeek-70B, and SafeWork-R1-Qwen2.5VL-7B. All resulting models demonstrate that safety and capability can co-evolve synergistically, highlighting the generalizability of our framework in building robust, reliable, and trustworthy general-purpose AI.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Shanghai AI Lab, :, Yicheng Bao, Guanxu Chen, Mingkang Chen, Yunhao Chen, Chiyu Chen, Lingjie Chen, Sirui Chen, Xinquan Chen, Jie Cheng, Yu Cheng, Dengke Deng, Yizhuo Ding, Dan Ding, Xiaoshan Ding, Yi Ding, Zhichen Dong, Lingxiao Du, Yuyu Fan, Xinshun Feng, Yanwei Fu, Yuxuan Gao, Ruijun Ge, Tianle Gu, Lujun Gui, Jiaxuan Guo, Qianxi He, Yuenan Hou, Xuhao Hu, Hong Huang, Kaichen Huang, Shiyang Huang, Yuxian Jiang, Shanzhe Lei, Jie Li, Lijun Li, Hao Li, Juncheng Li, Xiangtian Li, Yafu Li, Lingyu Li, Xueyan Li, Haotian Liang, Dongrui Liu, Qihua Liu, Zhixuan Liu, Bangwei Liu, Huacan Liu, Yuexiao Liu, Zongkai Liu, Chaochao Lu, Yudong Lu, Xiaoya Lu, Zhenghao Lu, Qitan Lv, Caoyuan Ma, Jiachen Ma, Xiaoya Ma, Zhongtian Ma, Lingyu Meng, Ziqi Miao, Yazhe Niu, Yuezhang Peng, Yuan Pu, Han Qi, Chen Qian, Xingge Qiao, Jingjing Qu, Jiashu Qu, Wanying Qu, Wenwen Qu, Xiaoye Qu, Qihan Ren, Qingnan Ren, Qingyu Ren, Jing Shao, Wenqi Shao, Shuai Shao, Dongxing Shi, Xin Song, Xinhao Song, Yan Teng, Xuan Tong, Yingchun Wang, Xuhong Wang, Shujie Wang, Xin Wang, Yige Wang, Yixu Wang, Yuanfu Wang, Futing Wang, Ruofan Wang, Wenjie Wang, Yajie Wang, Muhao Wei, Xiaoyu Wen, Fenghua Weng, Yuqi Wu, Yingtong Xiong. 2025-07-24. SafeWork-R1: Coevolving Safety and Intelligence under the AI-45$^{\circ}$ Law. https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.18576

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Decoupling Readiness from Release for Tail-Aware Scheduling of Agentic LLM Workflows

Agentic LLM workflows consist of sequences of model turns interleaved with tool interactions, so their end-to-end completion time depends not only on inference speed but also on when ready turns are released. Most runtimes release each turn immediately upon readiness. Under contention, this eager release policy can accumulate released but unfinished work; once submitted, those turns can no longer be reordered by the workflow-level policy, increasing tail latency. We present a tail-risk-aware turn release scheduling method that jointly decides which ready turn to release next and how much released but unfinished work to maintain. The method uses a mean--Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) objective to capture the evolving tail risk of unfinished workflows, incorporates online estimates of turn work when prioritizing ready turns, and adapts the released work budget to observed queue pressure. We evaluate the method using real agent execution traces from software engineering tasks across multiple LLMs and workflow arrival rates. The method performs comparably to eager release under light load and substantially reduces the P95 of workflow flow time under contention, achieving up to a \(3.50\times\) speedup.

cs.AI

Demystifying the Privacy-Utility Trade-off in LLM Interactions

The integration of Large Language Models into daily tasks relies on context-rich instructions, inevitably exposing sensitive user information. Current privacy-preserving methods typically employ context-agnostic static rules, causing severe utility degradation. However, the specific mechanisms governing how sanitization impacts downstream performance remain largely underexplored. To address this, we conduct a systematic analysis to deconstruct the privacy-utility trade-off, uncovering three underlying mechanisms: (1) Context-Dependent Utility, which first establishes when to sanitize by revealing that data value shifts from critical constraints to dispensable noise based on user intent; (2) Strategic Adaptation, which subsequently determines how to sanitize by dictating that the choice between removal and replacement depends on the task's reliance on factual integrity versus structural coherence; and (3) Combinatorial Interplay, which finally extends the protection scope by demonstrating that attributes form a semantic web of synergistic dependencies or antagonistic redundancies. Guided by these insights, we introduce an intent-driven local protection framework. By distilling a lightweight model Veilmind-4B to drive a dynamic extraction-sanitization-restoration pipeline, our approach reaches a low-leakage privacy point while preserving substantially higher response utility than existing privacy-oriented baselines, advancing the privacy-utility trade-off toward the Pareto frontier.

cs.AI

Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks

The term agent in artificial intelligence lacks a standard definition, complicating the evaluation, comparison, and reproducibility of AI agent research. We address this ambiguity through a survey organized around five dimensions of agenticness: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal-directed behavior, and temporal coherence. For each dimension, we examine how the underlying capability has been conceptualized across prior work and synthesize the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess it. This review provides a structured account of the current landscape of agent evaluation, highlighting both established approaches and areas where evaluation remains limited or inconsistent. We additionally introduce the Agent Compendium, a public-facing digital resource that organizes and extends the evaluation methods identified through this review. Together, the survey and compendium provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems, supporting more reproducible research, clearer communication, and more systematic study of artificial agents.

cs.AI