Abstract
Vision-language models (VLMs) are increasingly applied to identify unsafe or inappropriate images due to their internal ethical standards and powerful reasoning abilities. However, it is still unclear whether they can recognize various unsafe concepts when presented in different modalities, such as text and images. To address this, we first compile the UnsafeConcepts dataset, featuring 75 unsafe concepts, i.e., ``Swastika,'' ``Sexual Harassment,'' and ``Assaults,'' along with associated 1.5K images. We then conduct a systematic evaluation of VLMs' perception (concept recognition) and alignment (ethical reasoning) capabilities. We assess eight popular VLMs and find that, although most VLMs accurately perceive unsafe concepts, they sometimes mistakenly classify these concepts as safe. We also identify a consistent modality gap among open-source VLMs in distinguishing between visual and textual unsafe concepts. To bridge this gap, we introduce a simplified reinforcement learning (RL)-base