Inverse IFEval: Can LLMs Unlearn Stubborn Training Conventions to Follow Real Instructions?

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.04292v1
• Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2025 15:03:02 GMT
• Title: Inverse IFEval: Can LLMs Unlearn Stubborn Training Conventions to Follow Real Instructions?
• Authors: Qinyan Zhang, Xinping Lei, Ruijie Miao, Yu Fu, Haojie Fan, Le Chang, Jiafan Hou, Dingling Zhang, Zhongfei Hou, Ziqiang Yang, Changxin Pu, Fei Hu, Jingkai Liu, Mengyun Liu, Yang Liu, Xiang Gao, Jiaheng Liu, Tong Yang, Zaiyuan Wang, Ge Zhang, Wenhao Huang,
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) achieve strong performance on diverse tasks but often exhibit cognitive inertia.<n>We propose Inverse IFEval, a benchmark that measures models' capacity to override training-induced biases and comply with adversarial instructions.
• Score: 36.957333458197034
• License: http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) achieve strong performance on diverse tasks but often exhibit cognitive inertia, struggling to follow instructions that conflict with the standardized patterns learned during supervised fine-tuning (SFT). To evaluate this limitation, we propose Inverse IFEval, a benchmark that measures models Counter-intuitive Abilitytheir capacity to override training-induced biases and comply with adversarial instructions. Inverse IFEval introduces eight types of such challenges, including Question Correction, Intentional Textual Flaws, Code without Comments, and Counterfactual Answering. Using a human-in-the-loop pipeline, we construct a dataset of 1012 high-quality Chinese and English questions across 23 domains, evaluated under an optimized LLM-as-a-Judge framework. Experiments on existing leading LLMs demonstrate the necessity of our proposed Inverse IFEval benchmark. Our findings emphasize that future alignment efforts should not only pursue fluency and factual correctness but also account for adaptability under unconventional contexts. We hope that Inverse IFEval serves as both a diagnostic tool and a foundation for developing methods that mitigate cognitive inertia, reduce overfitting to narrow patterns, and ultimately enhance the instruction-following reliability of LLMs in diverse and unpredictable real-world scenarios.

Related papers

• LLM-assisted Semantic Option Discovery for Facilitating Adaptive Deep Reinforcement Learning [23.916253226597956]
  Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) is still suffering from critical issues in practical applications.<n>Recent research shows that integrating Large Language Models (LLMs) with symbolic planning is promising in addressing these challenges.<n>We introduce a novel LLM-driven closed-loop framework, which enables semantic-driven skill reuse and real-time constraint monitoring.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-02T05:54:02Z)
• Latent Chain-of-Thought for Visual Reasoning [53.541579327424046]
  Chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning is critical for improving the interpretability and reliability of Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs)<n>We reformulate reasoning in LVLMs as posterior inference and propose a scalable training algorithm based on amortized variational inference.<n>We empirically demonstrate that the proposed method enhances the state-of-the-art LVLMs on seven reasoning benchmarks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-27T23:10:06Z)
• Towards Reliable and Practical LLM Security Evaluations via Bayesian Modelling [1.0266286487433585]
  It is critical to understand vulnerabilities accurately before adopting a new large language model (LLM) architecture.<n>Existing evaluations can be difficult to trust, often drawing conclusions from LLMs that are not meaningfully comparable.<n>We propose a principled and practical end-to-end framework for evaluating LLM vulnerabilities to prompt injection attacks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-07T09:22:22Z)
• Do LLMs estimate uncertainty well in instruction-following? [9.081508933326644]
  Large language models (LLMs) could be valuable personal AI agents across various domains, provided they can precisely follow user instructions.<n>We present the first systematic evaluation of the uncertainty estimation abilities of LLMs in the context of instruction-following.<n>Our findings show that existing uncertainty methods struggle, particularly when models make subtle errors in instruction following.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-18T16:32:10Z)
• On the Hardness of Faithful Chain-of-Thought Reasoning in Large Language Models [25.029579061612456]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly being employed in real-world applications in critical domains such as healthcare. It is important to ensure that the Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning generated by these models faithfully captures their underlying behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-15T13:16:44Z)
• Towards Effective Evaluations and Comparisons for LLM Unlearning Methods [97.2995389188179]
  This paper seeks to refine the evaluation of machine unlearning for large language models.<n>It addresses two key challenges -- the robustness of evaluation metrics and the trade-offs between competing goals.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-13T14:41:00Z)
• Unveiling the Misuse Potential of Base Large Language Models via In-Context Learning [61.2224355547598]
  Open-sourcing of large language models (LLMs) accelerates application development, innovation, and scientific progress. Our investigation exposes a critical oversight in this belief. By deploying carefully designed demonstrations, our research demonstrates that base LLMs could effectively interpret and execute malicious instructions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-04-16T13:22:54Z)
• Uncertainty Quantification for In-Context Learning of Large Language Models [52.891205009620364]
  In-context learning has emerged as a groundbreaking ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) We propose a novel formulation and corresponding estimation method to quantify both types of uncertainties. The proposed method offers an unsupervised way to understand the prediction of in-context learning in a plug-and-play fashion.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-15T18:46:24Z)
• Gaining Wisdom from Setbacks: Aligning Large Language Models via Mistake Analysis [127.85293480405082]
  The rapid development of large language models (LLMs) has not only provided numerous opportunities but also presented significant challenges. Existing alignment methods usually direct LLMs toward the favorable outcomes by utilizing human-annotated, flawless instruction-response pairs. This study proposes a novel alignment technique based on mistake analysis, which deliberately exposes LLMs to erroneous content to learn the reasons for mistakes and how to avoid them.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-16T14:59:10Z)
• TRACE: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Continual Learning in Large Language Models [52.734140807634624]
  Aligned large language models (LLMs) demonstrate exceptional capabilities in task-solving, following instructions, and ensuring safety. Existing continual learning benchmarks lack sufficient challenge for leading aligned LLMs. We introduce TRACE, a novel benchmark designed to evaluate continual learning in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-10T16:38:49Z)
• Are Large Language Models Really Robust to Word-Level Perturbations? [68.60618778027694]
  We propose a novel rational evaluation approach that leverages pre-trained reward models as diagnostic tools. Longer conversations manifest the comprehensive grasp of language models in terms of their proficiency in understanding questions. Our results demonstrate that LLMs frequently exhibit vulnerability to word-level perturbations that are commonplace in daily language usage.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-20T09:23:46Z)

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.