MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409362363 · doi:10.1609/aaai.v39i25.34821

Perception-Guided Jailbreak Against Text-to-Image Models

2025· article· en· W4409362363 on OpenAlexaff
Yihao Huang, Liang Le, Tianlin Li, Xiaojun Jia, Run Wang, Weikai Miao, Geguang Pu, Yang Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Education and Child Care
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesMinistry of Education of the People's Republic of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNational Research Foundation SingaporeNational Research Foundation
KeywordsPerceptionImage (mathematics)Computer sciencePsychologyArtificial intelligenceCognitive psychologyNatural language processingNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, Text-to-Image (T2I) models have garnered significant attention due to their remarkable advancements. However, security concerns have emerged due to their potential to generate inappropriate or Not-Safe-For-Work (NSFW) images. In this paper, inspired by the observation that texts with different semantics can lead to similar human perceptions, we propose an LLM-driven perception-guided jailbreak method, termed PGJ. It is a black-box jailbreak method that requires no specific T2I model (model-free) and generates highly natural attack prompts. Specifically, we propose identifying a safe phrase that is similar in human perception yet inconsistent in text semantics with the target unsafe word and using it as a substitution. The experiments conducted on six open-source models and commercial online services with thousands of prompts have verified the effectiveness of PGJ.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.261 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial IntelligenceSame topicAdversarial Robustness in Machine LearningFrench-language works237,207