arXiv AI By Minji Kim, Hyounghun Kim

Refuse without Refusal: A Structural Analysis of Safety-Tuning Responses for Reducing False Refusals in Language Models

Read the original on arXiv AI →

The paper investigates how large language models balance helpfulness and safety by refusing harmful queries while responding to benign ones. It decomposes safety-tuning responses into a boilerplate refusal statement and a rationale, finding that the statement causes false refusals by relying on superficial cues. Training on rationales alone reduces false refusals without compromising safety performance, suggesting that fine‑grained safety supervision is essential for better alignment.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

arXiv AI
Sep 17

Beyond Routine Compliance: Cunning Data Cultivates Safety Vigilance in Large Language Models

The paper introduces "cunning questions"—non‑safety prompts that contain misleading premises or subtle inconsistencies—to train large language models (LLMs) to scrutinize underlying intent and assumptions. Experiments show that incorporating these questions improves robustness against out‑of‑distribution jailbreak attacks and enhances subsequent safety fine‑tuning, achieving a new state‑of‑the‑art reduction in mean ASR from 17.40% to 15.05% across nine backbone–benchmark combinations. The authors argue that this training fosters vigilance, enabling models to prioritize safety judgments before engaging in harmful planning.

By Youjia Wang, Lin Xu, Yang Sun, Yuxiao Lu, Chengfang Fang, Jie Shi
arXiv Computation and Language
3d ago

AfriGuard: Safety and Robust Refusal For African Languages

arXiv:2610.26474v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) designed to interact with users are typically trained to respond appropriately to harmful or toxic content. However, e...

By Israel Abebe Azime, Jesujoba O. Alabi, Iffat Maab, Alexander D. Cai, Tadesse Destaw Belay, Atnafu Lambebo Tonja, Jonas Kgomo, Folasade Alabi, Salomey Osei, Saminu Muhammad Aliyu, Nkechinyere Faith Aguobi, Bontu Fufa Balcha, Blessing Sibanda, Davis David, Mouhamadane Mboup, Daud Abolade, Neo Putini, Louis Powell, Kiant'e Brantley, Philipp Slusallek, Dietrich Klakow, Julia Kreutzer
arXiv AI
Sep 15

How Semantically Stable Are LLM Refusals? Measuring Confusion in Local Safety Boundaries

The paper introduces Semantic Confusion to assess how consistently large language models refuse similar prompts. It presents ParaGuard, a 10k‑prompt corpus of controlled paraphrase clusters, and proposes three token‑level metrics—Confusion Index, Confusion Rate, and Confusion Depth—to measure contradictory refusal decisions across meaning‑preserving paraphrases. Experiments show that global false rejection rates can mask local inconsistencies, revealing that refusal evaluation must consider both frequency and consistency across nearby paraphrases.

By Riad Ahmed Anonto, Md Labid Al Nahiyan, Md Tanvir Hassan