On the Eligibility of LLMs for Counterfactual Reasoning: A Decompositional Study

Counterfactual reasoning has emerged as a crucial technique for generalizing the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs). By generating and analyzing counterfactual scenarios, researchers can assess the adaptability and reliability of model decision-making. Although prior work has shown that LLMs often struggle with counterfactual reasoning, it remains unclear which factors most significantly impede their performance across different tasks and modalities. In this paper, we propose a decompositional strategy that breaks down the counterfactual generation from causality construction to the reasoning over counterfactual interventions. To support decompositional analysis, we investigate 11 datasets spanning diverse tasks, including natural language understanding, mathematics, programming, and vision-language tasks. Through extensive evaluations, we characterize LLM behavior across each decompositional stage and identify how modality type and intermediate reasoning influence performance. By establishing a structured framework for analyzing counterfactual reasoning, this work contributes to the development of more reliable LLM-based reasoning systems and informs future elicitation strategies.

Buckle Up: Robustifying LLMs at Every Customization Stage via Data Curation

Large language models (LLMs) are extensively adapted for downstream applications through a process known as "customization," with fine-tuning being a common method for integrating domain-specific expertise. However, recent studies have revealed a vulnerability that tuning LLMs with malicious samples can compromise their robustness and amplify harmful content, an attack known as "jailbreaking." To mitigate such attack, we propose an effective defensive framework utilizing data curation to revise commonsense texts and enhance their safety implication from the perspective of LLMs. The curated texts can mitigate jailbreaking attacks at every stage of the customization process: before customization to immunize LLMs against future jailbreak attempts, during customization to neutralize jailbreaking risks, or after customization to restore the compromised models. Since the curated data strengthens LLMs through the standard fine-tuning workflow, we do not introduce additional modules during LLM inference, thereby preserving the original customization process. Experimental results demonstrate a substantial reduction in jailbreaking effects, with up to a 100% success in generating responsible responses. Notably, our method is effective even with commonsense texts, which are often more readily available than safety-relevant data. With the every-stage defensive framework and supporting experimental performance, this work represents a significant advancement in mitigating jailbreaking risks and ensuring the secure customization of LLMs.