Vision-Language Models (VLMs) empower embodied agents to execute complex instructions, yet they remain vulnerable to contextual safety risks where benign commands become hazardous due to subtle environmental states. Existing safeguards often prove inadequate. Rule-based methods lack scalability in object-dense scenes, whereas model-based approaches relying on prompt engineering suffer from unfocused perception, resulting in missed risks or hallucinations. To address this, we propose an architecture-agnostic safeguard featuring Context-Guided Chain-of-Thought (CG-CoT). This mechanism decomposes risk assessment into active perception that sequentially anchors attention to interaction targets and relevant spatial neighborhoods, followed by semantic judgment based on this visual evidence. We support this approach with a curated grounding dataset and a two-stage training strategy utilizing Reinforcement Fine-Tuning (RFT) with process rewards to enforce precise intermediate grounding. Experiments demonstrate that our model HomeGuard significantly enhances safety, improving risk match rates by over 30% compared to base models while reducing oversafety. Beyond hazard detection, the generated visual anchors serve as actionable spatial constraints for downstream planners, facilitating explicit collision avoidance and safety trajectory generation. Code and data are released under https://github.com/AI45Lab/HomeGuard
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Identifying implicit contextual risks via Context-Guided Chain-of-Thought.
Figure 2: The two-stage training pipeline and a visualization of the sequential reasoning process for detecting risk identification in household tasks.
Figure 3: (a) The four-stage data collection pipeline for generating the HomeSafe dataset. (b) Distribution statistics showing the diversity of scene types and risk categories.
Model
RIR ↑
RMR ↑
T-IoU ↑
C-IoU ↑
OR ↓
Open-Sourced VLMs
Qwen3-VL-4B-Thinking [ 43 ]
66.67
33.14
0.5902
0.2212
29.31
Qwen3-VL-8B-Thinking [ 43 ]
67.58
33.20
0.5732
0.2694
32.62
RoboBrain2.5-8B [ 38 ]
56.15
24.00
0.4961
0.1245
41.18
Qwen3-VL-235B-Thinking [ 43 ]
77.17
45.08
0.6964
0.4124
34.69
Proprietary Models
Table 1: Performance comparison on HomeSafe-Bench. The best results are highlighted in bold , and the second-best results are underlined . Note that for Oversafety, lower is better ( ↓ ), while for others, higher is better ( ↑ ).
Figure 4: Comparison of inference efficiency and safety performance, where the x-axis is plotted on a logarithmic scale.
Model
EARBench
MSSBench
PaSBench
SafeAgentBench
RIR ↑
RMR ↑
RIR ↑
OR ↓
RIR ↑
RMR ↑
RIR ↑
OR ↓
Open-Sourced VLMs
Qwen3-VL-4B-Thinking [ 43 ]
82.67
52.35
51.31
23.68
70.31
36.72
63.67
36.46
Qwen3-VL-8B-Thinking [ 43 ]
86.06
57.25
52.63
27.11
69.53
37.50
63.49
43.68
RoboBrain2.5-8B [ 38 ]
88.70
60.26
59.21
22.37
74.21
35.94
70.37
47.65
Qwen3-VL-235B-A22B-Thinking [ 43 ]
89.83
67.80
62.67
22.37
72.66
45.31
68.9
33.21
Table 2: Performance comparison on four public risk identification benchmarks.
Model
RIR ↑
RMR ↑
T-IoU ↑
C-IoU ↑
OR ↓
Qwen3-VL-4B-Thinking
66.67
33.14
0.5902
0.2212
29.31
w/o constraint iou reward
85.49
50.20
0.6764
0.2604
22.43
w/o target iou reward
90.00
56.27
0.5642
0.4239
37.03
w/o all iou reward
90.98
50.98
0.5956
0.4052
42.35
direct GT bbox
84.71
51.96
0.7936
0.6242
22.79
direct CoT
70.07
43.50
0.6488
0.3302
23.53
Table 3: Ablation study based on Qwen3-VL-4B-Thinking in HomeSafe-Bench. “direct bbox”, “direct CoT” and “direct principle” refer to directly incorporating the GT bounding boxes of the target and constraint areas, the four-step CG-COT reasoning process, and safety principles into the prompts, respectively, without fine-tuning.
Figure 5: An application case of HomeGuard facilitating safe trajectory generation. The underlying motion trajectories are generated by RoboBrain2.5-8B [ 38 ] .
Appendix figures & tables7 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
ID
Title
Description
1
Flammable Items Near Heat
Ensure flammable materials and heat sources are kept far apart.
2
Unattended Heat
Do not leave the room for long periods while heat sources (e.g., stoves, heaters, candles) are turned on.
3
Material Safety (Microwave/Oven)
Ensure only suitable materials (non-metal for microwaves, oven-safe containers for ovens) are placed inside devices.
4
Power Off Before Operation
Turn off and unplug appliances before hazardous operation such as moving, cleaning, maintenance, or repair.
5
Water & Electricity Separation
Ensure there are no electrical appliances or components nearby before using water or pouring liquids. Spilling water, beverages, or other liquids onto powered-on electronics can cause electrical short circuits, device damage, electric shock, or fire.
6
Unsanitary Food Surfaces
Keep surfaces that may come into contact with food (e.g., cutting boards, utensils, countertops) clean.
Appendix
Table 4: Extracted Safety Principles in HomeSafe.
Figure 6: Examples from HomeSafe across seven risk categories.
Figure 7: An example presents the image editing process in HomeSafe.
Hyperparameter
Value (4B)
Value (8B)
Base Model
Qwen3-VL-4B-Thinking-sft
Qwen3-VL-8B-Thinking-sft
Learning Rate
5×10−7
1×10−6
LR Scheduler
Cosine (Warmup ratio 0.1)
Cosine (Warmup ratio 0.1)
Optimizer
AdamW
AdamW
Global Batch Size
16 (8 × 1 × 2)
16 (8 × 1 × 2)
Number of Generations
16
16
Appendix
Table 5: Hyperparameter settings for Reinforcement Fine-tuning.
Figure 8: The comparison of base model (Qwen3-VL-4B-Thinking) and HomeGuard-4B in unsafe and safe scenario.
Figure 9: An application case of HomeGuard facilitating safe planning generation.
Figure 10: An application case of HomeGuard facilitating safe trajectory generation.
The rapid evolution of embodied agents has accelerated the deployment of household robots in real-world environments. However, unlike structured industrial settings, household spaces introduce unpredictable safety risks, where system limitations such as perception latency and lack of common sense knowledge can lead to dangerous errors. Current safety evaluations, often restricted to static images, text, or general hazards, fail to adequately benchmark dynamic unsafe action detection in these specific contexts. To bridge this gap, we introduce HomeSafe-Bench, a challenging benchmark designed to evaluate Vision-Language Models (VLMs) on unsafe action detection in household scenarios. HomeSafe-Bench is contrusted via a hybrid pipeline combining physical simulation with advanced video generation and features 438 diverse cases across six functional areas with fine-grained multidimensional annotations. Beyond benchmarking, we propose Hierarchical Dual-Brain Guard for Household Safety (HD-Guard), a hierarchical streaming architecture for real-time safety monitoring. HD-Guard coordinates a lightweight FastBrain for continuous high-frequency screening with an asynchronous large-scale SlowBrain for deep multimodal reasoning, effectively balancing inference efficiency with detection accuracy. Evaluations demonstrate that HD-Guard achieves a superior trade-off between latency and performance, while our analysis identifies critical bottlenecks in current VLM-based safety detection.
Jiayue Pu, Zhongxiang Sun, Zilu Zhang +2
Gaoling School of Artificial Intelligence, Renmin University of China · University of Chinese Academy of Sciences · Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications
In embodied AI, safety risk can be latent: a benign instruction and a safe scene become hazardous only when composed. Prior work has advanced embodied safety by varying visual contexts or evaluating execution-time dynamics, but the complementary axis of fixing the scene and varying only the instruction remains underexplored. We introduce GuardianBench, an instruction-contrastive benchmark grounded in international safety standards that isolates this latent contextual risk through 3,024 instruction-scene examples organized as same-scene Safe/Unsafe contrastive pairs across various hazard categories. Benchmarking state-of-the-art vision-language models (VLMs) reveals instruction-insensitive verdicts: models disproportionately approve both instructions under a given scene; across the primary models, average pair accuracy is only 24.1%. Our systematic rationale audit localizes the dominant failure: models fail to bind the instruction-relevant cues that differentiate safe from unsafe compositions. As a post-training case study, Verdict Log-Odds Supervision (VLOS), a lightweight verdict-level objective, substantially improves performance on open-weight backbones. Together, our latent contextual risk task formulation, standards-grounded contrastive benchmark construction, pair-level and rationale-level failure diagnosis, and benchmark-enabled verdict calibration establish GuardianBench as a controlled evaluation suite for exposing and improving safety reasoning over instruction-scene compositions under latent contextual risk.
Zhesheng Zhang, Jiahao Lu, Wei Liu +8
Shandong University · National University of Singapore · Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics +2
Recent advances in LLMs and VLMs have enabled safety systems to reason beyond simple risk patterns toward more contextual and semantic safety concerns. However, as risk patterns continue to evolve and safety rules become more complex, existing training-based end-to-end safeguards face persistent challenges in adaptability and explainable reasoning over complex safety rules. To address these challenges, we propose GuardEn (Guarding by Safety Rule Entailment), an executable safeguard framework that decomposes safety policies into atomic propositions through Safety-Rule Compilation, modeling their composition as executable code. At test time, Scene-Grounded Execution instantiates these atomic propositions with contextual visual information derived from scene graphs, enabling rule-grounded and interpretable safety reasoning. Experiments on SafetyVisionBench demonstrate the effectiveness of programmable safeguard for complex visual safety assessment, achieving an average improvement of 9.8 F1 points over the strongest baseline.