arXiv:2603.08275v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: With the widespread adoption of Large Language Models (LLMs), respecting indigenous cultures becomes essential for models' culturally safety and responsible global applications. Existing studies separately consider cultural safety and cultural knowledge and neglect that the former should be grounded by the latter. This severely prevents LLMs from yielding culture-specific respectful responses. Consequently, adaptive cultural safety remains a formidable task. In this work, we propose to jointly model cultural safety and knowledge. First and foremost, cultural-safety and knowledge-paired data serve as the key prerequisite to conduct this research. However, the cultural diversity across regions and the subtlety of cultural differences pose significant challenges to the creation of such paired evaluation data. To address this issue, we propose a novel framework that integrates authoritative cultural knowledge descriptions curation, LLM-automated query generation, and heavy manual verification. Accordingly, we obtain a dataset named AdaCultureSafe containing 4.8K manually decomposed fine-grained cultural descriptions and the corresponding 48K manually verified safety- and knowledge-oriented queries. Upon the constructed dataset, we evaluate three families of popular LLMs on their cultural safety and knowledge proficiency, via which we make a critical discovery: no significant correlation exists between their cultural safety and knowledge proficiency. We then delve into the utility-related neuron activations within LLMs to investigate the potential cause of the absence of correlation, which can be attributed to the difference of the objectives of pre-training and post-alignment. We finally present a knowledge-grounded method, which significantly enhances cultural safety by enforcing the integration of knowledge into the LLM response generation process.

arXiv:2602.14135v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Rapidly evolving AI exhibits increasingly strong autonomy and goal-directed capabilities, accompanied by derivative systemic risks that are more unpredictable, difficult to control, and potentially irreversible. However, current AI safety evaluation systems suffer from critical limitations such as restricted risk dimensions and failed frontier risk detection. The lagging safety benchmarks and alignment technologies can hardly address the complex challenges posed by cutting-edge AI models. To bridge this gap, we propose the "ForesightSafety Bench" AI Safety Evaluation Framework, beginning with 7 major Fundamental Safety pillars and progressively extends to advanced Embodied AI Safety, AI4Science Safety, Social and Environmental AI risks, Catastrophic and Existential Risks, as well as 8 critical industrial safety domains, forming a total of 94 refined risk dimensions. To date, the benchmark has accumulated tens of thousands of structured risk data points and assessment results, establishing a widely encompassing, hierarchically clear, and dynamically evolving AI safety evaluation framework. Based on this benchmark, we conduct systematic evaluation and in-depth analysis of over twenty mainstream advanced large models, identifying key risk patterns and their capability boundaries. The safety capability evaluation results reveals the widespread safety vulnerabilities of frontier AI across multiple pillars, particularly focusing on Risky Agentic Autonomy, AI4Science Safety, Embodied AI Safety, Social AI Safety and Catastrophic and Existential Risks. Our benchmark is released at https://github.com/Beijing-AISI/ForesightSafety-Bench. The project website is available at https://foresightsafety-bench.beijing-aisi.ac.cn/.