Vulnerability Mitigation for Safety-Aligned Language Models via Debiasing

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.02153v1
• Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2025 09:31:54 GMT
• Title: Vulnerability Mitigation for Safety-Aligned Language Models via Debiasing
• Authors: Thien Q. Tran, Akifumi Wachi, Rei Sato, Takumi Tanabe, Youhei Akimoto,
• Abstract summary: Safety alignment is an essential research topic for real-world AI applications. Our study first identified the difficulty of eliminating such vulnerabilities without sacrificing the model's helpfulness. Our method could enhance the model's helpfulness while maintaining safety, thus improving the trade-off-front.
• Score: 12.986006070964772
• License:
• Abstract: Safety alignment is an essential research topic for real-world AI applications. Despite the multifaceted nature of safety and trustworthiness in AI, current safety alignment methods often focus on a comprehensive notion of safety. By carefully assessing models from the existing safety-alignment methods, we found that, while they generally improved overall safety performance, they failed to ensure safety in specific categories. Our study first identified the difficulty of eliminating such vulnerabilities without sacrificing the model's helpfulness. We observed that, while smaller KL penalty parameters, increased training iterations, and dataset cleansing can enhance safety, they do not necessarily improve the trade-off between safety and helpfulness. We discovered that safety alignment could even induce undesired effects and result in a model that prefers generating negative tokens leading to rejective responses, regardless of the input context. To address this, we introduced a learning-free method, Token-level Safety-Debiased Inference (TSDI), to estimate and correct this bias during the generation process using randomly constructed prompts. Our experiments demonstrated that our method could enhance the model's helpfulness while maintaining safety, thus improving the trade-off Pareto-front.

Related papers

• Equilibrate RLHF: Towards Balancing Helpfulness-Safety Trade-off in Large Language Models [24.168387024091082]
  Fine-tuning large language models (LLMs) based on human preferences has been effective in improving their performance. Maintaining safety throughout the fine-tuning process remains a significant challenge. We propose an Equilibrate RLHF framework that achieves better safety alignment even with fewer training data.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-17T08:40:30Z)
• STAIR: Improving Safety Alignment with Introspective Reasoning [44.780098674618614]
  We propose STAIR, a framework that integrates SafeTy Alignment with Itrospective Reasoning. We show that STAIR effectively mitigates harmful outputs while better preserving helpfulness, compared to instinctive alignment strategies. With test-time scaling, STAIR achieves a safety performance comparable to Claude-3.5 against popular jailbreak attacks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-02-04T15:02:55Z)
• SafetyAnalyst: Interpretable, transparent, and steerable safety moderation for AI behavior [56.10557932893919]
  We present SafetyAnalyst, a novel AI safety moderation framework. Given an AI behavior, SafetyAnalyst uses chain-of-thought reasoning to analyze its potential consequences. It aggregates all harmful and beneficial effects into a harmfulness score using fully interpretable weight parameters.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-22T03:38:37Z)
• What Makes and Breaks Safety Fine-tuning? A Mechanistic Study [64.9691741899956]
  Safety fine-tuning helps align Large Language Models (LLMs) with human preferences for their safe deployment. We design a synthetic data generation framework that captures salient aspects of an unsafe input. Using this, we investigate three well-known safety fine-tuning methods.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-14T16:12:57Z)
• Refuse Whenever You Feel Unsafe: Improving Safety in LLMs via Decoupled Refusal Training [67.30423823744506]
  This study addresses a critical gap in safety tuning practices for Large Language Models (LLMs) We introduce a novel approach, Decoupled Refusal Training (DeRTa), designed to empower LLMs to refuse compliance to harmful prompts at any response position. DeRTa incorporates two novel components: (1) Maximum Likelihood Estimation with Harmful Response Prefix, which trains models to recognize and avoid unsafe content by appending a segment of harmful response to the beginning of a safe response, and (2) Reinforced Transition Optimization (RTO), which equips models with the ability to transition from potential harm to safety refusal consistently throughout the harmful
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-12T09:36:33Z)
• Safety Arithmetic: A Framework for Test-time Safety Alignment of Language Models by Steering Parameters and Activations [19.132597762214722]
  Current alignment methods struggle with dynamic user intentions and complex objectives. We propose Safety Arithmetic, a training-free framework enhancing safety across different scenarios. Our experiments show that Safety Arithmetic significantly improves safety measures, reduces over-safety, and maintains model utility.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-17T17:48:13Z)
• Safety through Permissibility: Shield Construction for Fast and Safe Reinforcement Learning [57.84059344739159]
  "Shielding" is a popular technique to enforce safety inReinforcement Learning (RL) We propose a new permissibility-based framework to deal with safety and shield construction.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-29T18:00:21Z)
• Safe Reinforcement Learning with Learned Non-Markovian Safety Constraints [15.904640266226023]
  We design a safety model that performs credit assignment to assess contributions of partial state-action trajectories on safety. We derive an effective algorithm for optimizing a safe policy using the learned safety model. We devise a method to dynamically adapt the tradeoff coefficient between safety reward and safety compliance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-05T17:27:22Z)
• The Art of Defending: A Systematic Evaluation and Analysis of LLM Defense Strategies on Safety and Over-Defensiveness [56.174255970895466]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) play an increasingly pivotal role in natural language processing applications. This paper presents Safety and Over-Defensiveness Evaluation (SODE) benchmark.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-30T17:37:06Z)
• Towards Safer Generative Language Models: A Survey on Safety Risks, Evaluations, and Improvements [76.80453043969209]
  This survey presents a framework for safety research pertaining to large models. We begin by introducing safety issues of wide concern, then delve into safety evaluation methods for large models. We explore the strategies for enhancing large model safety from training to deployment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-02-18T09:32:55Z)
• Context-Aware Safe Reinforcement Learning for Non-Stationary Environments [24.75527261989899]
  Safety is a critical concern when deploying reinforcement learning agents for realistic tasks. We propose the context-aware safe reinforcement learning (CASRL) method to realize safe adaptation in non-stationary environments. Results show that the proposed algorithm significantly outperforms existing baselines in terms of safety and robustness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-02T23:52:22Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.