Skip to main content
LLM Security Database
Skip to research details
Back to research findings

Sound Induces Trimodal Collapse

Published
Analyzed
Paper-reported evidence
Primary source linked
Read primary paper
Cite & share
Source BibTeX

Citation metadata is maintained by the primary source and may reflect a later revision.

Paper-evaluated models(4)

  • VideoLLAMA2
  • Qwen 2 7B Instruct
  • Whisper Large-v2
  • PANNs
On this page

Description

A vulnerability exists in trimodal audio-video-language models where an attacker can systematically degrade multimodal reasoning through untargeted, audio-only adversarial perturbations. By optimizing a shared perturbation δ\delta applied to the audio channel, an attacker can manipulate internal representations—specifically targeting audio encoder embeddings and cross-modal attention mechanisms—without modifying visual or textual inputs. The attack exploits the model's reliance on the audio encoder (e.g., BEATs, Whisper-style encoders) and its projection into the language model space. The most effective attack vectors maximize the orthogonality between clean and perturbed audio embeddings (L(cos⁡)\mathcal{L}^{(\cos)}) or artificially amplify attention allocation to the audio tokens (L(audioatt)\mathcal{L}^{(\text{audioatt})}). This results in a high-confidence divergence from the ground truth answer, effectively blinding the model to visual context despite the video input remaining clean.

Examples

The vulnerability is reproduced by optimizing an additive perturbation δ\delta using Projected Gradient Descent (PGD) against the audio encoder's embedding space.

  1. Encoder-Space Attack Formulation: The attacker targets the audio encoder faf_a and projection layer gag_a. The objective is to minimize the cosine similarity between the clean audio embeddings (EcleanE_{\text{clean}}) and the perturbed audio embeddings (EadvE_{\text{adv}}): L(cos⁡)(δ)=1Ne∑i=1NeEclean[i]⋅Eadv[i]∥Eclean[i]∥2⋅∥Eadv[i]∥2\mathcal{L}^{(\cos)}(\delta) = \frac{1}{N_e} \sum_{i=1}^{N_e} \frac{\mathbf{E}_{\text{clean}}[i] \cdot \mathbf{E}_{\text{adv}}[i]}{\|\mathbf{E}_{\text{clean}}[i]\|_2 \cdot \|\mathbf{E}_{\text{adv}}[i]\|_2} Where Eadv=ga(fa(xa+δ))\mathbf{E}_{\text{adv}} = g_a(f_a(x_a + \delta)). Optimization is performed using Adam (learning rate 10−410^{-4}) with an ℓ∞\ell_\infty constraint ϵ\epsilon.

  2. Audio Attention Amplification: Alternatively, the attacker maximizes the attention mass assigned to audio tokens Ta\mathcal{T}_a to force the model to over-rely on the corrupted audio stream: L(audioatt)(δ)=−∑l=1L∑h=1H∑i=1N∑j∈TaAi,j(l,h)\mathcal{L}^{(\text{audioatt})}(\delta) = - \sum_{l=1}^{L} \sum_{h=1}^{H} \sum_{i=1}^{N} \sum_{j \in \mathcal{T}_a} \mathbf{A}^{(l,h)}_{i,j} Where A(l,h)\mathbf{A}^{(l,h)} represents the attention matrix at layer ll and head hh.

  3. Reference Implementation: See mathematical formulations in Appendix C.3 and C.5 of the paper. See dataset AVQA (opens in a new tab) for reproduction targets.

Impact

  • Multimodal Reasoning Failure: The attack achieves up to a 96.03% Attack Success Rate (ASR) on benchmarks like AVQA, reducing model accuracy from ~95% to ~4%.
  • Model Hallucination: The model generates incorrect answers with high confidence (confidence scores comparable to clean inputs), rendering output uncertainty metrics ineffective for detection.
  • Stealthiness: The attack is effective at low perceptual distortions (LPIPS ≤0.08\le 0.08) and does not require manipulation of the video feed or text prompt, making it difficult to detect via visual inspection or text-based filters.

Affected Systems

  • VideoLLAMA2 (specifically using BEATs encoder and Qwen2-7B-Instruct backbone).
  • Qwen 2.5 Omni (using Whisper-style audio encoder).
  • Qwen 3 Omni (using Whisper-style audio encoder).
  • Any trimodal foundation model employing independent audio encoders projected into a shared LLM embedding space without explicit robustness training.

Mitigation Steps

  • Cross-Modal Consistency Checking: Implement inference-time defenses that compare predictions derived from unimodal inputs (video-only vs. audio-only) against the trimodal output to detect inconsistencies caused by single-modality attacks.
  • Adversarial Training: Integrate adversarially perturbed audio samples into the instruction-tuning dataset to improve the robustness of the audio projector and LLM backbone.
  • Input Preprocessing: Apply audio purification techniques or re-encoding steps prior to the audio encoder to disrupt the structure of the adversarial perturbation δ\delta.
  • Gradient Shattering (Experimental): While not explicitly validated in the paper for trimodal models, techniques that disrupt gradient flow in the audio encoder (similar to AudioGuard) may reduce the efficacy of white-box optimization.

Research context and provenance

Catalog identifier
LMVD-b559f32f
Internal research identifier, not an official CVE identifier.
Evidence and verification
Paper-reported; independent reproduction is not documented.
Primary research source linked.
Severity
Not rated by this catalog.
Source and publication type
arXiv · Research preprint.
Peer-review status is not provided by this source.
Author and publication status
Author metadata is not stored; see the primary paper.
Threat model and attacker access
White-box access to model or deployment internals.
Related deployment categories
Vision-language models; Audio models
Taxonomy labels only; paper-specific deployment prerequisites are not inferred.
Affected systems
VideoLLAMA2 (specifically using BEATs encoder and Qwen2-7B-Instruct backbone). Qwen 2.5 Omni (using Whisper-style audio encoder). Qwen 3 Omni (using Whisper-style audio encoder). Any trimodal foundation model employing…

Research Paper

SoundBreak: A Systematic Study of Audio-Only Adversarial Attacks on Trimodal Models

Primary source: arXiv. Findings are reported by the cited research and have not been independently verified.

View Paper

Evidence

This entry is based on a primary research source. Its findings are paper-reported; independent reproduction and verification are not claimed.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.16231