Papers › A Causal Perspective for Enhancing Jailbreak Attack and Defense
A Causal Perspective for Enhancing Jailbreak Attack and Defense
Licheng Pan, Yunsheng Lu, Jiexi Liu, Jialing Tao, Haozhe Feng, Hui Xue, Zhixuan Chu, Kui Ren
Title, abstract, authors and date from arXiv's metadata (CC0); this paper is not in the Papers with Code archive (frozen 2025-07-28).
Uncovering the mechanisms behind "jailbreaks" in large language models (LLMs) is crucial for enhancing their safety and reliability, yet these mechanisms remain poorly understood. Existing studies predominantly analyze jailbreak prompts by probing latent representations, often overlooking the causal relationships between interpretable prompt features and jailbreak occurrences. In this work, we propose Causal Analyst, a framework that integrates LLMs into data-driven causal discovery to identify the direct causes of jailbreaks and leverage them for both attack and defense. We introduce a comprehensive dataset comprising 35k jailbreak attempts across seven LLMs, systematically constructed from 100 attack templates and 50 harmful queries, annotated with 37 meticulously designed human-readable prompt features. By jointly training LLM-based prompt encoding and GNN-based causal graph learning, we reconstruct causal pathways linking prompt features to jailbreak responses. Our analysis reveals that specific features, such as "Positive Character" and "Number of Task Steps", act as direct causal drivers of jailbreaks. We demonstrate the practical utility of these insights through two applications: (1) a Jailbreaking Enhancer that targets identified causal features to significantly boost attack success rates on public benchmarks, and (2) a Guardrail Advisor that utilizes the learned causal graph to extract true malicious intent from obfuscated queries. Extensive experiments, including baseline comparisons and causal structure validation, confirm the robustness of our causal analysis and its superiority over non-causal approaches. Our results suggest that analyzing jailbreak features from a causal perspective is an effective and interpretable approach for improving LLM reliability. Our code is available at https://github.com/Master-PLC/Causal-Analyst.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2602.04893")
Code
Syntology Ran 3 of 5 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 2 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 3 ran with no contract checked.
By repository: found in paper text by Syntology: 5 samples from 1 repository, 3 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
5 samples harvested; 3 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 2 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 0 of the 5 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from Master-PLC/Causal-Analyst. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
3a1da1d05f23b202 · report
5f86e84a8bd6d2d5 · report
7e423932593696a9 · report
aee6beb843bd077e · report
beb993005a8f2ad3 · report
Results from the paper
The Papers with Code archive ends with its 2025-07-28 snapshot. This paper's arXiv identifier, 2602.04893, was issued in February 2026, after that date, so the archive has no leaderboard rows for it.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections