CompanionSafe: From Multi-turn Safety Evaluation to Guardrails for AI Companions
Preprint introducing CompanionSafe, which pairs a multi-turn AI-companion safety benchmark (CompanionEval, 1,300 persona-character-scenario settings across 13 harm categories) with a companion-specific guard model (CompanionGuard). Ten closed- and open-weight models were run as companion characters against a simulated user at four conversation lengths. Unsafe rates rose with conversation length, and models with low overall failure rates still failed more often on relational categories such as infidelity, control and manipulation.
Publisher
arXiv (Xi'an Jiaotong University; Shanghai Artificial Intelligence Laboratory)
Published
13 Oct 2026
Added
1 week ago
DOI
—
Key Findings
- Averaged over ten models, the unsafe rate (ASR) rose from 9.80% at 1 turn to 19.71% at 3, 25.08% at 5 and 28.14% at 7 turns; eight of ten models increased monotonically.
- Among unsafe trajectories, 16.42% first became unsafe at the first assistant turn and 83.58% later; 15.92% first became unsafe only at turns 6-7.
- Average ASR ranged from 3.80% (GPT-5.6 Luna) to 40.63% (Doubao Seed 2.0 Lite) among closed models and from 6.99% (MiMo V2.6 Pro) to 43.18% (Qwen3-32B) among open-weight models.
- For the five lowest-ASR models, mean ASR on four relational categories (disregard, control, manipulation, infidelity) was 9.54% against 6.37% on the other nine; GPT-5.6 Luna reached 27.00% on infidelity.
- CompanionGuard (LoRA on Llama-Guard-3-8B, trained on 16,846 turn-localized examples) scored 68.31 macro-F1 on an 857-example held-out set, 30.95 points above policy-aligned gpt-oss-safeguard-20B; policy-aligned Llama-Guard-3-8B and Qwen3Guard-Gen-8B scored zero F1 on all four relational categories.
Methodology Notes
Synthetic benchmark. 13-category companion-harm taxonomy taken from prior work; test points generated with Claude Opus 5; personas sampled (100 per category) from 20,725 filtered candidates built from a 23-attribute schema with GPT-4o; matched character cards and two-sentence scenarios generated by GPT-4o. Gemini 3.8 Flash plays the user (pressure-testing prompt); the evaluated model is blind to the test point. Claude Sonnet 5 judges safe/unsafe (kappa 0.95 against human labels on a 130-data-point subset run on three models). Dialogues cut short by Gemini's safety filter are excluded from ASR. Guard training labels come from the LLM judge, not human verification (authors' stated limitation); interactions capped at seven turns; English. Code, scenarios and taxonomy in GitHub AI45Lab/CompanionSafe (MIT); guard data on Hugging Face (MIT); LoRA adapter under the Llama 3 licence. v1 submitted 2026-10-13 10:13 UTC (40 pages).
Sources
arXiv preprint(opens in a new tab) (primary)
Code and benchmark data (GitHub, MIT)(opens in a new tab) (13 Oct 2026)
CompanionGuard training and test data (Hugging Face)(opens in a new tab) (13 Oct 2026)
CompanionGuard LoRA adapter (Hugging Face)(opens in a new tab) (13 Oct 2026)
Archived snapshot (Wayback Machine)(opens in a new tab) — preserved against link rot
Topics
Authors
Xinyang Liao, Lingyu Li, Kaicheng Shen, Yang Yao, Na Lu, Yan Teng, Xia Hu
Tags
Cite This
APA
Xinyang Liao et al. (2026). CompanionSafe: From Multi-turn Safety Evaluation to Guardrails for AI Companions. arXiv (Xi'an Jiaotong University; Shanghai Artificial Intelligence Laboratory). https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.18095
Related Insights
CompanionHarm: A Multi-Turn Benchmark for Detecting Harms in Real-World AI Companion Conversations
arXiv (Nanyang Technological University; National University of Singapore) · 26 Aug 2026
AICompanionBench: Benchmarking LLMs-as-Judges for AI Companion Safety
arXiv · 3 Jun 2026
Persona-Grounded Safety Evaluation of AI Companions in Multi-Turn Conversations
Association for Computational Linguistics (Proceedings of the 64th Annual Meeting of the ACL, Volume 1: Long Papers) · 1 Jul 2026
Persona-Grounded Safety Evaluation of AI Companions in Multi-Turn Conversations
arXiv preprint · 30 Apr 2026