跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2605.28137 · v2

No Safe Dose: How Training Data Drives Unsafe Image Generation

首次提交 2026-05-27 16:21
版本更新 2026-11-06 21:04
雷达观测 2026-11-09 11:19
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Text-to-image models are trained on web-scale data that inevitably contains unsafe images, yet whether this contamination directly drives unsafe generation has not been tested under controlled conditions. We train the same text-to-image model on corpora that differ only in their fraction of unsafe images (0% to 9.6%) and in size (100K to 8M), and evaluate 10,000 generations per model with four independent safety classifiers. Output unsafety rises monotonically and saturates, from 16.6% at 0% to 26.4% at 9.6% contamination, and the effect appears only under adversarial prompts. At a fixed training budget, the level is set by the proportion of unsafe images rather than their absolute count or cumulative exposure, so filtering a fixed fraction is equally effective at 1M and 8M images, at no measurable cost in FID, CLIPScore, or ImageReward. Filtering alone, however, does not eliminate unsafe generation: a floor persists when every image flagged by any of four judges is removed (13.6%) and rises when training on real instead of synthetic images (23.1%). A safety-aligned text encoder lowers the floor to 9.6%, but it is not carried by a removable encoder direction, which implicates the generative backbone. Finally, fine-tuning on entirely safe data erodes the benefit of curation (+8.7pp). Data curation and encoder choice are complementary and effective, but neither makes a model safe on its own.

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

本站首次收录为 v2,暂无更早版本可对照。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v2 · 2026-11-06 21:04 · 最新观测版本

No Safe Dose: How Training Data Drives Unsafe Image Generation

Text-to-image models are trained on web-scale data that inevitably contains unsafe images, yet whether this contamination directly drives unsafe generation has not been tested under controlled conditions. We train the same text-to-image model on corpora that differ only in their fraction of unsafe images (0% to 9.6%) and in size (100K to 8M), and evaluate 10,000 generations per model with four independent safety classifiers. Output unsafety rises monotonically and saturates, from 16.6% at 0% to 26.4% at 9.6% contamination, and the effect appears only under adversarial prompts. At a fixed training budget, the level is set by the proportion of unsafe images rather than their absolute count or cumulative exposure, so filtering a fixed fraction is equally effective at 1M and 8M images, at no measurable cost in FID, CLIPScore, or ImageReward. Filtering alone, however, does not eliminate unsafe generation: a floor persists when every image flagged by any of four judges is removed (13.6%) and rises when training on real instead of synthetic images (23.1%). A safety-aligned text encoder lowers the floor to 9.6%, but it is not carried by a removable encoder direction, which implicates the generative backbone. Finally, fine-tuning on entirely safe data erodes the benefit of curation (+8.7pp). Data curation and encoder choice are complementary and effective, but neither makes a model safe on its own.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗