Breaking Safety at the Token Boundary: How BPE Tokenization Creates Exploitable Gaps in LLM Alignment
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.01239v1
- Date: Fri, 01 May 2026 18:57:03 GMT
- Title: Breaking Safety at the Token Boundary: How BPE Tokenization Creates Exploitable Gaps in LLM Alignment
- Abstract summary: Character-level perturbations bypass safety alignment in modern LLMs despite leaving prompts human-readable.<n>We identify and test a central structural mechanism: BPE tokenization fragments safety-critical words into sub-word pieces.
- Score: 9.127363793428119
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: Character-level perturbations bypass safety alignment in modern LLMs despite leaving prompts human-readable. We identify and test a central structural mechanism: BPE tokenization fragments safety-critical words into sub-word pieces, and the three public alignment datasets we surveyed contain no intentionally fragmented inputs. The mechanism is a chain, tested end-to-end on five model families (Qwen-3-4B, Qwen-2.5-7B, Gemma-3-4B, Llama-3.1-8B, Mistral-7B). An optimization targeting safety-token fragmentation flips the first-token refusal trigger on 80-100% of refused HarmBench prompts, with 48% of those flips producing genuinely harmful outputs (per-model 29-65%; gap-vs-behavior ROC-AUC 0.66-0.98, pooled 0.84). Activation patching localizes the disrupted signal to the last ${\sim}30\%$ of layers; an alignment-data scan finds zero fragmented prompts among 30,000 examples (positive-control recall $\geq 99\%$ at attack-relevant intensities); and targeted-mutation experiments isolate safety words as the disruption locus. On the defense side, a 68-cell grid (55 trained checkpoints) shows that no DPO configuration achieves seed- and pool-stable ASR closure on the three families with closed pool-size confounds. SFT trained on fragmented prompts closes ASR on 3/5 families but only via global collapse that raises refusal on benign prompts as well, indicating the missing distribution is necessary but not sufficient under the LoRA-16 recipe we tested. To distinguish selective repair from global collapse, we introduce Conv-Benign, a candidate paired diagnostic. All ASR claims are 3-judge-calibrated (cell rankings stable across judges; absolute levels $\pm$18pp; see App.~B.13).
Related papers
- Layer-Isolated Evaluation: Gating the Deterministic Scaffold of a Production LLM Agent with a No-LLM, Regression-Locked Test Harness [45.148328075418156]
A deployed ordering agent is decomposed into a fixed taxonomy of layers.<n>The pure suite runs in CI on every change against a locked per-slice baseline.<n>We validate by controlled regression injection, degrading one layer at a time across seven non-safety layers.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-06-10T05:55:13Z) - Catching One in Five: LLM-as-Judge Blind Spots in Production Multi-Turn Transaction Agents [45.148328075418156]
We study a deployed multi-turn food-and-beverage ordering agent and measure how many genuine quality problems it catches.<n>Our blind-spot taxonomy shows the failure is structured, not random.<n>For production multi-turn agents, automated judging is a regression floor, not a substitute for human review.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-06-09T02:11:01Z) - Willing but Unable: Separating Refusal from Capability in Code LLMs via Abliteration [3.9458538778648964]
This paper is a preliminary study of abliteration, a low-rank weight edit that replicates out the refusal stream as a tool to remove this barrier.<n> Vulnerability verdicts are produced by a three-tool detector ensemble (QLCode, Sem, Bandit) followed by manual adjudication.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-06-03T20:06:52Z) - Distributional Energy-Based Models for Uncertainty-Aware Structured LLM Reasoning [40.342912574072024]
Large Language Models produce structured outputs such as travel plans or code solutions.<n>Individual reasoning steps may appear correct while the output as a whole violates budgets, fails test cases, or contradicts earlier deductions.<n>We propose a learned quality scorer with deterministic analytical constraint penalties for verifying structured LLM outputs.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-15T17:08:27Z) - SURE-RAG: Sufficiency and Uncertainty-Aware Evidence Verification for Selective Retrieval-Augmented Generation [6.604874054866016]
We present SURE-RAG, a transparent aggregation protocol built on the observation that evidence sufficiency is a set-level property.<n>A shared pair-level claim-evidence verifier produces local relation distributions, which SURE-RAG aggregates into interpretable answer-level signals.<n>We evaluate on HotpotQA-RAG v3, a controlled multi-hop benchmark, under an artifact-aware protocol.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-05-05T09:05:40Z) - Refute-or-Promote: An Adversarial Stage-Gated Multi-Agent Review Methodology for High-Precision LLM-Assisted Defect Discovery [0.685316573653194]
Refute-or-Promote is an inference-time reliability pattern combining Stratified Context Hunting (SCH) for candidate generation, adversarial kill mandates, context, and a Cross-Model Critic (CMC)<n>We present Refute-or-Promote, an inference-time reliability pattern combining Stratified Context Hunting (SCH) for candidate generation, adversarial kill mandates, context, and a Cross-Model Critic (CMC)<n>We present Refute-or-Promote, an inference-time reliability pattern combining Stratified Context Hunting (SCH) for candidate generation, adversarial kill mandates, context, and a Cross-Model Critic (CMC)
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-21T03:55:35Z) - Persona Non Grata: Single-Method Safety Evaluation Is Incomplete for Persona-Imbued LLMs [5.478971182058342]
Safety evaluations almost always study prompt-based personas alone.<n>We show this is incomplete: prompting and activation steering expose *different*, architecture-dependent vulnerability profiles.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-04-13T07:34:02Z) - Improving Search Agent with One Line of Code [68.58667107354253]
Tool-based Agentic Reinforcement Learning (TARL) has emerged as a promising paradigm for training search agents to interact with external tools.<n>We propose textbfSearch textbfAgent textbfPolicy textbfOptimization (textbfSAPO), which stabilizes training via a conditional token-level KL constraint.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-03-10T04:07:39Z) - From Black Box to Glass Box: Cross-Model ASR Disagreement to Prioto Review in Ambient AI Scribe Documentation [43.148402136307716]
Cross-model disagreement among heterogeneous ASR systems can act as a reference-free uncertainty signal.<n>We transcribed 50 publicly available medical audio clips with eight ASR systems spanning commercial APIs and open-source engines.<n>Low-agreement regions were enriched for content disagreements, with the content fraction increasing from 53.9% to 73.9% across quintiles of high-risk mass.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-03-02T13:02:13Z) - What Matters For Safety Alignment? [38.86339753409445]
This paper presents a comprehensive empirical study on the safety alignment capabilities of AI systems.<n>We systematically investigate and compare the influence of six critical intrinsic model characteristics and three external attack techniques.<n>We identify the LRMs GPT-OSS-20B, Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Thinking, and GPT-OSS-120B as the top-three safest models.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2026-01-07T12:31:52Z) - CARE What Fails: Contrastive Anchored-REflection for Verifiable Multimodal [84.71254539482369]
Group-relative reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards (RLVR) often wastes the most informative data it already has the failures.<n>We present CARE, a failure-centric post-training framework for multimodal reasoning that turns errors into supervision.<n> CARE improves accuracy and training smoothness while explicitly increasing the share of learning signal that comes from failures.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2025-12-22T16:34:21Z)
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.