arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 2609.03781

IndicSafeEval: Safety Robustness of Large Language Models under Multilingual Persuasive Jailbreak Attacks

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in multilingual settings, yet their safety is still evaluated primarily in English. This limits our understanding of how alignment failures manifest in low-resource and culturally diverse languages. We introduce IndicSafeEval, a persuasion-based jailbreak evaluation framework for Indian languages. Our benchmark combines ten safety critical content categories with six human-like persuasive strategies across four different Indian languages, such as Hindi, Bengali, Marathi and Punjabi, resulting in 7,200 adversarial prompts. We conduct a systematic black-box evaluation of several open-source LLMs to examine how their safety behaviour varies across languages, persuasion strategies, and risk categories. Our analysis shows that the model does not behave equally safely across all languages and prompt styles. Instead, safety performance depends strongly on both the languages used and the way a request is phrased using persuasive cues. We further observe that different risk categories exhibit different levels of vulnerability, with some types of harmful content being significantly more susceptible to persuasion-based jailbreaks than others. These findings reveal important limitations of current safety evaluations, which are largely English-centric, and underscore the need for multilingual and persuasion-aware benchmarking frameworks to more accurately assess real-world LLM safety. Our implementation is available at https://github.com/MonSaikat/IndicSafeEval. Warning: this paper contains example data that may be offensive or harmful.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Saikat Mondal, Mamta, Deeksha Varshney, Oana Cocarascu, Asif Ekbal. 2026-09-04. IndicSafeEval: Safety Robustness of Large Language Models under Multilingual Persuasive Jailbreak Attacks. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.03781

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

Discover connections

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Lost-in-the-Middle in Long-Text Generation: Synthetic Dataset, Evaluation Framework, and Mitigation

Existing long-text generation methods produce lengthy outputs from short inputs, leaving long-input-to-long-output generation underexplored. As input length increases, LLMs increasingly overlook information in the middle of the context--a limitation known as the "lost-in-the-middle" phenomenon--leading to inconsistent and incoherent outputs. To address this problem, we propose Retrieval-Augmented Long-Text Writer (RAL-Writer), a training-free framework consisting of a Planner that generates writing steps and a Writer that produces content according to these steps. The Writer jointly models semantic relevance and positional bias to compute importance scores, dynamically retrieve critical input segments, and strategically restate them. We also construct a benchmark dataset for long-input-to-long-output generation and introduce three evaluation metrics covering length, consistency, and quality. We evaluate RAL-Writer against comparable baselines on this dataset. The results demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach. Code is available at https://github.com/OnlyAR/RAL-Writer.

cs.CL

SDUs DAISY: A Benchmark for Danish Culture

We introduce Daisy, a factual knowledge benchmark for Danish cultural heritage, based on curated topics from the Danish Culture Canon 2006. For each artifact in the culture canon, we query the corresponding Wikipedia page and have a language model generate a diverse set of questions. Within each artifact, we sample both central and peripheral questions, testing not only mainstream information but also the deeper, defining elements of Danish cultural heritage as identified by the Canon committee. Each question-answer pair is manually approved or corrected, yielding a final dataset of 741 closed-ended question-answer pairs ranging from archaeological findings dated to 1300 BCE and 18th-century poems and musical pieces through to contemporary pop music, Danish design, and architecture. Baseline results on our benchmark show that contemporary language models (GPT-OSS-120B & 20B, Llama-3.3-70B, Gemma3-27B, and Mistral-3.1-24B) perform surprisingly poorly on this task, despite the tested factual knowledge being available on Wikipedia. The best-performing model, Llama-3.3-70B, attains only 0.17 BLEU and an F1 score of 0.27, demonstrating the benchmark's difficulty. The questions, model benchmarks, and the evaluation tool are publicly available at https://github.com/schneiderkamplab/SDU-Daisy and under schneiderkamplab/SDU-Daisy on Hugging Face Datasets.

cs.CL

Is my model perplexed for the right reason? Contrasting LLMs' Benchmark Behavior with Token-Level Perplexity

Standard evaluations of Large language models (LLMs) focus on task performance, offering limited insight into whether correct behavior reflects appropriate underlying mechanisms and risking confirmation bias. We introduce a simple, principled interpretability framework based on token-level perplexity to test whether models rely on linguistically relevant cues. By comparing perplexity distributions over minimal sentence pairs differing in one or a few `pivotal' tokens, our method enables precise, hypothesis-driven analysis without relying on unstable feature-attribution techniques. Experiments on controlled linguistic benchmarks with several open-weight LLMs show that, while linguistically important tokens influence model behavior, they never fully explain perplexity shifts, revealing that models rely on heuristics other than the expected linguistic ones.

cs.CL