paper-with-me

홈 › Papers

The Wrong Kind of Right: Quantifying and Localizing Misfired Alignment in LLMs

2026-06-17 · Naihao Deng, Yiming Feng, Chimaobi Okite, Kaijian Zou, Lu Wang, Rada Mihalcea, Yulong Chen arxiv

Warning: This paper studies stereotypes and biases, and contains potentially disturbing examples, used for illustration purposes only. Our findings should not be interpreted as an argument against alignment. Instead, this paper highlights the need for principled approaches to more advanced alignment. Alignment aims to ensure that large language models (LLMs) behave safely and reliably, including by avoiding unsafe inferences. However, we show that such safety-oriented behaviors can misfire: models may reject warranted conclusions even when they are explicitly supported by context. We call this failure mode misfired alignment, where alignment-induced changes cause LLMs to override explicit evidence. To quantify this phenomenon, specifically on stereotype-related alignment, we introduce VETO, a benchmark consisting of 2,032 BBQ-derived contrastive pairs, and define a new metric, Misfired Alignment Rate (MAR), which measures on a 0 to 100 scale how often a model fails on a stereotype-related question but succeeds on its contrastive counterpart. We benchmark 25 LLMs on VETO, and show that all LLMs, including the most recent ones, exhibit non-trivial (4.7 to 18.9%) MARs while all human participants achieve 0.0% MAR. Controlled priming experiments further show that alignment-induced cues can substantially amplify MAR across LLMs, indicating that these failures are not merely artifacts of individual examples but can be induced by safety-related framing. Mechanistic analyses on open-weight LLMs reveal late-layer suppression of evidence-supported answers, and comparisons between instruct and base LLMs suggest that this suppression emerges after instruction training. These findings show that current alignment methods can overgeneralize surface-level safety cues, to the point of overriding objective evidence, motivating more work on alignment objectives that better preserve contextual grounding.

📄 PDF Abstract BibTeX arXiv:2606.18656

Code (0)

등록된 구현이 없습니다.

Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반

What Knowledge is Needed to Solve the RTE5 Textual Entailment Challenge?

2018-06-10 · Peter Clark

This document gives a knowledge-oriented analysis of about 20 interesting Recognizing Textual Entailment (RTE) examples, drawn from the 2005 RTE5 competition test set. The analysis ignores shallow statistical matching te…

Natural Language InferenceRTEWorld Knowledge

"EHLO WORLD" -- Checking If Your Conversational AI Knows Right from Wrong

2020-06-18 · Elayne Ruane, Vivek Nallur

In this paper we discuss approaches to evaluating and validating the ethical claims of a Conversational AI system. We outline considerations around both a top-down regulatory approach and bottom-up processes. We describe…

Chatbot

Varying Shades of Wrong: Aligning LLMs with Wrong Answers Only

2024-10-14 · Jihan Yao, Wenxuan Ding, Shangbin Feng, Lucy Lu Wang 외

In the absence of abundant reliable annotations for challenging tasks and contexts, how can we expand the frontier of LLM capabilities with potentially wrong answers? We focus on two research questions: (1) Can LLMs gene…

GRPO, Dr. GRPO, and DAPO Are Three Operations on One Number: The Group-Standard-Deviation Identity

2026-06-30 · Yong Yi Bay, Kathleen A. Yearick hf

Three of the most popular methods for training language models to reason look like three different tricks. They are not. All three adjust a single number: standard deviation, reflecting how much a prompt's sampled answer…

The CNN-based Coronary Occlusion Site Localization with Effective Preprocessing Method

2019-12-18 · YeongHyeon Park, Il Dong Yun, Si-Hyuck Kang

The Coronary Artery Occlusion (CAO) acutely comes to human, and it highly threats the human's life. When CAO detected, Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) should be conducted timely. Before PCI, localizing the CAO i…