Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41644948›Full record

ArticleNature communications2026

Large reasoning models are autonomous jailbreak agents.

Thilo Hagendorff, Erik Derner, Nuria Oliver

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Thilo HagendorffUniversity of Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany. thilo.hagendorff@iris.uni-stuttgart.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4633-2153
Erik DernerELLIS Alicante, Alicante, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7588-7668
Nuria OliverELLIS Alicante, Alicante, Spain.

Funding

Ministerium für Wissenschaft, Forschung und Kunst Baden-Württemberg (Ministry of Science, Research and Art Baden-Württemberg) Az. 33-7533-9-19/54/5
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Jailbreaking - bypassing built-in safety mechanisms in AI models - has traditionally required complex technical procedures or specialized human expertise. In this study, we show that the persuasive capabilities of large reasoning models (LRMs) simplify and scale jailbreaking, converting it into an inexpensive activity accessible to non-experts. We evaluated the capabilities of four LRMs (DeepSeek-R1, Gemini 2.5 Flash, Grok 3 Mini, Qwen3 235B) to act as autonomous adversaries conducting multi-turn conversations with nine widely used target models. LRMs received instructions via a system prompt, before proceeding to planning and executing jailbreaks with no further supervision. We performed extensive experiments with a benchmark of harmful prompts covering several sensitive domains. This setup yielded an overall jailbreak success rate across all model combinations of 97.14%. Our study reveals an alignment regression, in which LRMs can systematically erode the safety guardrails of other models, highlighting the urgent need to further align frontier models not only to resist jailbreak attempts, but also to prevent them from being co-opted into acting as jailbreak agents.

Identifiers

PMID41644948
PMCPMC12881495

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.