Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) excel at structural reasoning yet suffer from a sharp logical brittleness in structural consistency. We term this phenomenon Structural Cognitive Overload (SCO), a byproduct of the contention between deep reasoning and safety alignment. However, prior work has predominantly targeted typographic and pixel-level perturbations, leaving the study of SCO largely unexplored. To this end, we propose StructBreak, an automated end-to-end framework designed to quantify SCO. By leveraging StructBreak, we uncover a novel higher-order cognitive overload attack paradigm; notably, this attack operates under a practical black-box setting, requiring no internal model access. Consequently, we utilize this framework to establish a comprehensive benchmark spanning ten diverse threat scenarios. Empirical evaluations on six leading MLLMs reveal that SCO readily triggers toxic generation, yielding a 92% average ASR (up to 97% on Gemini 2.5). To elucidate the mechanism of SCO, we further conduct model-level interpretations spanning attention dynamics, latent space topology, and geometric analysis. Our findings reveal that StructBreak acts as a novel structural channel to circumvent safety filters. Furthermore, the limited efficacy of inherent safety mechanisms underscores that current alignment paradigms are insufficient for the era of complex multimodal reasoning.

Large language models (LLMs) exhibit exceptional performance but pose inherent risks of generating toxic content, restricting their safe deployment. While traditional methods (e.g., alignment) adjust output preferences, they fail to eliminate underlying toxic regions in parameters, leaving models vulnerable to adversarial attacks. Prior mechanistic studies characterize toxic regions as "toxic vectors" or "layer-wise subspaces", yet our analysis identifies critical limitations: i) Removed toxic vectors can be reconstructed via linear combinations of non-toxic vectors, demanding targeting of entire toxic subspace; ii) Contrastive objective over limited samples inject noise into layer-wise subspaces, hindering stable extraction. These highlight the challenge of identifying robust toxic subspace and removing them. Therefore, we propose GLOSS (GLobal tOxic Subspace Suppression), a lightweight method that mitigates toxicity by identifying and eliminating this global subspace from FFN parameters. Experiments on LLMs (e.g., Qwen3) show GLOSS achieves SOTA detoxification while preserving general capabilities without requiring large-scale retraining.

As LLM-generated text becomes increasingly prevalent on the internet, often containing hallucinations or biases, detecting such content has emerged as a critical area of research.Recent methods have demonstrated impressive performance in detecting text generated entirely by LLMs.However, in real-world scenarios, users often introduce perturbations to the LLM-generated text, and the robustness of existing detection methods against these perturbations has not been sufficiently explored.This paper empirically investigates this challenge and finds that even minor perturbations can severely degrade the performance of current detection methods. To address this issue, we find that the syntactic tree is minimally affected by disturbances and exhibits distinct differences between human-written and LLM-generated text.Therefore, we propose a detection method based on syntactic trees, which can capture features invariant to perturbations.It demonstrates significantly improved robustness against perturbation on the HC3 and GPT-3.5-mixed datasets.Moreover, it also has the shortest time expenditure.We provide the code and data at https://github.com/thulx18/PRDetect.

With the development of Large Language Models (LLMs), numerous efforts have revealed their vulnerabilities to jailbreak attacks. Although these studies have driven the progress in LLMs’ safety alignment, it remains unclear whether LLMs have internalized authentic knowledge to deal with real-world crimes, or are merely forced to simulate toxic language patterns. This ambiguity raises concerns that jailbreak success is often attributable to a hallucination loop between jailbroken LLM and judger LLM. By decoupling the use of jailbreak techniques, we construct knowledge-intensive Q&A to investigate the misuse threats of LLMs in terms of dangerous knowledge possession, harmful task planning utility, and harmfulness judgment robustness. Experiments reveal a mismatch between jailbreak success rates and harmful knowledge possession in LLMs, and existing LLM-as-a-judge frameworks tend to anchor harmfulness judgments on toxic language patterns. Our study reveals a gap between existing LLM safety assessments and real-world threat potential.

Current studies have exposed the risk of Large Language Models (LLMs) generating harmful content by jailbreak attacks. However, they overlook that the direct generation of harmful content from scratch is more difficult than inducing LLM to calibrate benign content into harmful forms.In our study, we introduce a novel attack framework that exploits AdVersArial meTAphoR (AVATAR) to induce the LLM to calibrate malicious metaphors for jailbreaking.Specifically, to answer harmful queries, AVATAR adaptively identifies a set of benign but logically related metaphors as the initial seed.Then, driven by these metaphors, the target LLM is induced to reason and calibrate about the metaphorical content, thus jailbroken by either directly outputting harmful responses or calibrating residuals between metaphorical and professional harmful content.Experimental results demonstrate that AVATAR can effectively and transferably jailbreak LLMs and achieve a state-of-the-art attack success rate across multiple advanced LLMs.