Refuse without Refusal: A Structural Analysis of Safety-Tuning Responses for Reducing False Refusals in Language Models
Striking a balance between helpfulness and safety remains a fundamental challenge in aligning large language models. To achieve this balance, models should refuse harmful queries (e.g., "How do I shoot someone?") while remaining responsive to benign inputs, even those superficially resembling harmful queries (e.g., "Where can I shoot a good photo?"). However, models often struggle to distinguish genuinely harmful queries from benign queries that contain superficially risky language, resulting in false refusals. In this paper, we address the issue by decomposing a response in the safety-tuning dataset into two distinct components: (i) a boilerplate refusal statement and (ii) a rationale explaining the refusal. Our experiments and analyses show that refusal statements impede accurate discrimination between harmful and benign queries by inducing reliance on superficial cues. In contrast, training solely on rationales reduces false refusals while maintaining a comparable level of safety performance. Rationale-Only benefits also appear in our ICL configuration and remain compatible with the evaluated inference-time mitigation methods. The results emphasize the necessity of precisely curated, fine-grained safety supervision datasets and outline directions for constructing aligned agents that better reconcile helpfulness with safety.
Code (3)
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
EVOREFUSE: Evolutionary Prompt Optimization for Evaluation and Mitigation of LLM Over-Refusal to Pseudo-Malicious Instructions
Large language models (LLMs) frequently refuse to respond to pseudo-malicious instructions: semantically harmless input queries triggering unnecessary LLM refusals due to conservative safety alignment, significantly impa…
Safety AlignmentDeactivating Refusal Triggers: Understanding and Mitigating Overrefusal in Safety Alignment
Safety alignment aims to ensure that large language models (LLMs) refuse harmful requests by post-training on harmful queries paired with refusal answers. Although safety alignment is widely adopted in industry, the over…
Refusing Intent, Not Form: Wrapper-Based Intent-Group Supervision for LLM Safety
Safety tuning can improve harmful refusal, but models may learn surface-form shortcuts: wrapped harmful prompts bypass safety, while similarly wrapped benign prompts are over-refused. We propose Wrapper-Based Intent-Form…
Refuse Whenever You Feel Unsafe: Improving Safety in LLMs via Decoupled Refusal Training
This study addresses a critical gap in safety tuning practices for Large Language Models (LLMs) by identifying and tackling a refusal position bias within safety tuning data, which compromises the models' ability to appr…
PositionSurgical, Cheap, and Flexible: Mitigating False Refusal in Language Models via Single Vector Ablation
Training a language model to be both helpful and harmless requires careful calibration of refusal behaviours: Models should refuse to follow malicious instructions or give harmful advice (e.g. "how do I kill someone?"), …
Language ModelingLanguage Modelling