Token-Efficient Prompt Injection Attack: Provoking Cessation in LLM Reasoning via Adaptive Token Compression

While reasoning large language models (LLMs) demonstrate remarkable performance across various tasks, they also contain notable security vulnerabilities. Recent research has uncovered a "thinking-stopped" vulnerability in DeepSeek-R1, where model-generated reasoning tokens can forcibly interrupt the inference process, resulting in empty responses that compromise LLM-integrated applications. However, existing methods triggering this vulnerability require complex mathematical word problems with long prompts--even exceeding 5,000 tokens. To reduce the token cost and formally define this vulnerability, we propose a novel prompt injection attack named "Reasoning Interruption Attack", based on adaptive token compression. We demonstrate that simple standalone arithmetic tasks can effectively trigger this vulnerability, and the prompts based on such tasks exhibit simpler logical structures than mathematical word problems. We develop a systematic approach to efficiently collect attack prompts and an adaptive token compression framework that utilizes LLMs to automatically compress these prompts. Experiments show our compression framework significantly reduces prompt length while maintaining effective attack capabilities. We further investigate the attack's performance via output prefix and analyze the underlying causes of the vulnerability, providing valuable insights for improving security in reasoning LLMs.

a1: Steep Test-time Scaling Law via Environment Augmented Generation

Large Language Models (LLMs) have made remarkable breakthroughs in reasoning, yet continue to struggle with hallucinations, logical errors, and inability to self-correct during complex multi-step tasks. Current approaches like chain-of-thought prompting offer limited reasoning capabilities that fail when precise step validation is required. We propose Environment Augmented Generation (EAG), a framework that enhances LLM reasoning through: (1) real-time environmental feedback validating each reasoning step, (2) dynamic branch exploration for investigating alternative solution paths when faced with errors, and (3) experience-based learning from successful reasoning trajectories. Unlike existing methods, EAG enables deliberate backtracking and strategic replanning through tight integration of execution feedback with branching exploration. Our a1-32B model achieves state-of-the-art performance among similar-sized models across all benchmarks, matching larger models like o1 on competition mathematics while outperforming comparable models by up to 24.4 percentage points. Analysis reveals EAG's distinctive scaling pattern: initial token investment in environment interaction yields substantial long-term performance dividends, with advantages amplifying proportionally to task complexity. EAG's theoretical framework demonstrates how environment interactivity and systematic branch exploration together establish a new paradigm for reliable machine reasoning, particularly for problems requiring precise multi-step calculation and logical verification.

Accelerating Particle-based Energetic Variational Inference

In this work, we propose a novel particle-based variational inference (ParVI) method that accelerates the EVI-Im. Inspired by energy quadratization (EQ) and operator splitting techniques for gradient flows, our approach efficiently drives particles towards the target distribution. Unlike EVI-Im, which employs the implicit Euler method to solve variational-preserving particle dynamics for minimizing the KL divergence, derived using a "discretize-then-variational" approach, the proposed algorithm avoids repeated evaluation of inter-particle interaction terms, significantly reducing computational cost. The framework is also extensible to other gradient-based sampling techniques. Through several numerical experiments, we demonstrate that our method outperforms existing ParVI approaches in efficiency, robustness, and accuracy.

Text Speaks Louder than Vision: ASCII Art Reveals Textual Biases in Vision-Language Models

Vision-language models (VLMs) have advanced rapidly in processing multimodal information, but their ability to reconcile conflicting signals across modalities remains underexplored. This work investigates how VLMs process ASCII art, a unique medium where textual elements collectively form visual patterns, potentially creating semantic-visual conflicts. We introduce a novel evaluation framework that systematically challenges five state-of-the-art models (including GPT-4o, Claude, and Gemini) using adversarial ASCII art, where character-level semantics deliberately contradict global visual patterns. Our experiments reveal a strong text-priority bias: VLMs consistently prioritize textual information over visual patterns, with visual recognition ability declining dramatically as semantic complexity increases. Various mitigation attempts through visual parameter tuning and prompt engineering yielded only modest improvements, suggesting that this limitation requires architectural-level solutions. These findings uncover fundamental flaws in how current VLMs integrate multimodal information, providing important guidance for future model development while highlighting significant implications for content moderation systems vulnerable to adversarial examples.

How does Watermarking Affect Visual Language Models in Document Understanding?

Visual Language Models (VLMs) have become foundational models for document understanding tasks, widely used in the processing of complex multimodal documents across domains such as finance, law, and academia. However, documents often contain noise-like information, such as watermarks, which inevitably leads us to inquire: \emph{Do watermarks degrade the performance of VLMs in document understanding?} To address this, we propose a novel evaluation framework to investigate the effect of visible watermarks on VLMs performance. We takes into account various factors, including different types of document data, the positions of watermarks within documents and variations in watermark content. Our experimental results reveal that VLMs performance can be significantly compromised by watermarks, with performance drop rates reaching up to 36\%. We discover that \emph{scattered} watermarks cause stronger interference than centralized ones, and that \emph{semantic contents} in watermarks creates greater disruption than simple visual occlusion. Through attention mechanism analysis and embedding similarity examination, we find that the performance drops are mainly attributed to that watermarks 1) force widespread attention redistribution, and 2) alter semantic representation in the embedding space. Our research not only highlights significant challenges in deploying VLMs for document understanding, but also provides insights towards developing robust inference mechanisms on watermarked documents.

Texture or Semantics? Vision-Language Models Get Lost in Font Recognition

Modern Vision-Language Models (VLMs) exhibit remarkable visual and linguistic capabilities, achieving impressive performance in various tasks such as image recognition and object localization. However, their effectiveness in fine-grained tasks remains an open question. In everyday scenarios, individuals encountering design materials, such as magazines, typography tutorials, research papers, or branding content, may wish to identify aesthetically pleasing fonts used in the text. Given their multimodal capabilities and free accessibility, many VLMs are often considered potential tools for font recognition. This raises a fundamental question: Do VLMs truly possess the capability to recognize fonts? To investigate this, we introduce the Font Recognition Benchmark (FRB), a compact and well-structured dataset comprising 15 commonly used fonts. FRB includes two versions: (i) an easy version, where 10 sentences are rendered in different fonts, and (ii) a hard version, where each text sample consists of the names of the 15 fonts themselves, introducing a stroop effect that challenges model perception. Through extensive evaluation of various VLMs on font recognition tasks, we arrive at the following key findings: (i) Current VLMs exhibit limited font recognition capabilities, with many state-of-the-art models failing to achieve satisfactory performance. (ii) Few-shot learning and Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting provide minimal benefits in improving font recognition accuracy across different VLMs. (iii) Attention analysis sheds light on the inherent limitations of VLMs in capturing semantic features.

Tricking Retrievers with Influential Tokens: An Efficient Black-Box Corpus Poisoning Attack

Retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) systems enhance large language models by incorporating external knowledge, addressing issues like outdated internal knowledge and hallucination. However, their reliance on external knowledge bases makes them vulnerable to corpus poisoning attacks, where adversarial passages can be injected to manipulate retrieval results. Existing methods for crafting such passages, such as random token replacement or training inversion models, are often slow and computationally expensive, requiring either access to retriever's gradients or large computational resources. To address these limitations, we propose Dynamic Importance-Guided Genetic Algorithm (DIGA), an efficient black-box method that leverages two key properties of retrievers: insensitivity to token order and bias towards influential tokens. By focusing on these characteristics, DIGA dynamically adjusts its genetic operations to generate effective adversarial passages with significantly reduced time and memory usage. Our experimental evaluation shows that DIGA achieves superior efficiency and scalability compared to existing methods, while maintaining comparable or better attack success rates across multiple datasets.

Innate Reasoning is Not Enough: In-Context Learning Enhances Reasoning Large Language Models with Less Overthinking

Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) have introduced Reasoning Large Language Models (RLLMs), which employ extended thinking processes with reflection and self-correction capabilities, demonstrating the effectiveness of test-time scaling. RLLMs exhibit innate Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning capability obtained from training, leading to a natural question: "Is CoT prompting, a popular In-Context Learning (ICL) method for chat LLMs, necessary to enhance the reasoning capability of RLLMs?" In this work, we present the first comprehensive analysis of the impacts of Zero-shot CoT and Few-shot CoT on RLLMs across mathematical reasoning tasks. We examine models ranging from 1.5B to 32B parameters, finding that contrary to concerns, CoT prompting significantly enhances RLLMs' performance in most scenarios. Our results reveal distinct patterns: large-capacity models show minimal improvement on simple tasks but substantial gains on complex problems, while smaller models exhibit the opposite behavior. Further analysis demonstrates that CoT prompting effectively controls the distribution of the numbers of thinking tokens and reasoning steps, reducing excessive reflections by approximately 90% in some cases. Moreover, attention logits analysis reveals the RLLMs' overfitting to reflection-related words, which is mitigated by external CoT guidance. Notably, our experiments indicate that for RLLMs, one-shot CoT consistently yields superior performance compared to Few-shot CoT approaches. Our findings provide important insights for optimizing RLLMs' performance through appropriate prompting strategies.

Process or Result? Manipulated Ending Tokens Can Mislead Reasoning LLMs to Ignore the Correct Reasoning Steps

Recent reasoning large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable improvements in mathematical reasoning capabilities through long Chain-of-Thought. The reasoning tokens of these models enable self-correction within reasoning chains, enhancing robustness. This motivates our exploration: how vulnerable are reasoning LLMs to subtle errors in their input reasoning chains? We introduce "Compromising Thought" (CPT), a vulnerability where models presented with reasoning tokens containing manipulated calculation results tend to ignore correct reasoning steps and adopt incorrect results instead. Through systematic evaluation across multiple reasoning LLMs, we design three increasingly explicit prompting methods to measure CPT resistance, revealing that models struggle significantly to identify and correct these manipulations. Notably, contrary to existing research suggesting structural alterations affect model performance more than content modifications, we find that local ending token manipulations have greater impact on reasoning outcomes than structural changes. Moreover, we discover a security vulnerability in DeepSeek-R1 where tampered reasoning tokens can trigger complete reasoning cessation. Our work enhances understanding of reasoning robustness and highlights security considerations for reasoning-intensive applications.

MIRAGE: Multimodal Immersive Reasoning and Guided Exploration for Red-Team Jailbreak Attacks

While safety mechanisms have significantly progressed in filtering harmful text inputs, MLLMs remain vulnerable to multimodal jailbreaks that exploit their cross-modal reasoning capabilities. We present MIRAGE, a novel multimodal jailbreak framework that exploits narrative-driven context and role immersion to circumvent safety mechanisms in Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs). By systematically decomposing the toxic query into environment, role, and action triplets, MIRAGE constructs a multi-turn visual storytelling sequence of images and text using Stable Diffusion, guiding the target model through an engaging detective narrative. This process progressively lowers the model's defences and subtly guides its reasoning through structured contextual cues, ultimately eliciting harmful responses. In extensive experiments on the selected datasets with six mainstream MLLMs, MIRAGE achieves state-of-the-art performance, improving attack success rates by up to 17.5% over the best baselines. Moreover, we demonstrate that role immersion and structured semantic reconstruction can activate inherent model biases, facilitating the model's spontaneous violation of ethical safeguards. These results highlight critical weaknesses in current multimodal safety mechanisms and underscore the urgent need for more robust defences against cross-modal threats.