mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Multitask Mayhem: Unveiling and Mitigating Safety Gaps in LLMs Fine-tuning

arXiv 2409.15361 ↗First posted 18 Sep 2024cs.CL cs.AI cs.LGcited by 8

On the map: LLM safety and security → Safety alignment, refusal and guardrails

Abstract (arXiv)

Recent breakthroughs in Large Language Models (LLMs) have led to their adoption across a wide range of tasks, ranging from code generation to machine translation and sentiment analysis, etc. Red teaming/Safety alignment efforts show that fine-tuning models on benign (non-harmful) data could compromise safety. However, it remains unclear to what extent this phenomenon is influenced by different variables, including fine-tuning task, model calibrations, etc. This paper explores the task-wise safety degradation due to fine-tuning on downstream tasks such as summarization, code generation, translation, and classification across various calibration. Our results reveal that: 1) Fine-tuning LLMs for code generation and translation leads to the highest degradation in safety guardrails. 2) LLMs generally have weaker guardrails for translation and classification, with 73-92% of harmful prompts answered, across baseline and other calibrations, falling into one of two concern categories. 3) Current solutions, including guards and safety tuning datasets, lack cross-task robustness. To address these issues, we developed a new multitask safety dataset effectively reducing attack success rates across a range of tasks without compromising the model's overall helpfulness. Our work underscores the need for generalized alignment measures to ensure safer and more robust models.

Key facts. Cited by 8 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Safety alignment, refusal and guardrails, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. Builds on 28 of its 48 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 Sep 2024.

Builds on

28 of 48 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2023Fine-tuning Aligned Language Models Compromises Safety, Even When Users Do Not Intend To!5 Oct

Other references · 27

  1. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
  2. 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,626
  3. 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,963
  4. 2021On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Modelscited by 4,033
  5. 2023QLoRA: Efficient Finetuning of Quantized LLMscited by 3,418
  6. 2022Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI Feedbackcited by 3,050
  7. 2021TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoodscited by 2,975
  8. 2023Jailbroken: How Does LLM Safety Training Fail?cited by 1,651
  9. 2020RealToxicityPrompts: Evaluating Neural Toxic Degeneration in Language Modelscited by 1,255
  10. 2023Llama Guard: LLM-based Input-Output Safeguard for Human-AI Conversationscited by 1,207
  11. 2023LIMA: Less Is More for Alignmentcited by 1,100
  12. 2023BeaverTails: Towards Improved Safety Alignment of LLM via a Human-Preference Datasetcited by 860
15 more
  1. 2020CrowS-Pairs: A Challenge Dataset for Measuring Social Biases in Masked Language Modelscited by 710
  2. 2023Prompt Injection attack against LLM-integrated Applicationscited by 605
  3. 2024How Johnny Can Persuade LLMs to Jailbreak Them: Rethinking Persuasion to Challenge AI Safety by Humanizing LLMscited by 573
  4. 2024BigCodeBench: Benchmarking Code Generation with Diverse Function Calls and Complex Instructionscited by 546
  5. 2018A Discourse-Aware Attention Model for Abstractive Summarization of Long Documentscited by 478
  6. 2023Safety-Tuned LLaMAs: Lessons From Improving the Safety of Large Language Models that Follow Instructionscited by 387
  7. 2023Low-Resource Languages Jailbreak GPT-4cited by 309
  8. 2024SALAD-Bench: A Hierarchical and Comprehensive Safety Benchmark for Large Language Modelscited by 228
  9. 2024When Scaling Meets LLM Finetuning: The Effect of Data, Model and Finetuning Methodcited by 204
  10. 2022"I'm sorry to hear that": Finding New Biases in Language Models with a Holistic Descriptor Datasetcited by 162
  11. 2023Purple Llama CyberSecEval: A Secure Coding Benchmark for Language Modelscited by 138
  12. 2023An LLM can Fool Itself: A Prompt-Based Adversarial Attackcited by 116
  13. 2024LISA: Layerwise Importance Sampling for Memory-Efficient Large Language Model Fine-Tuningcited by 89
  14. 2024Universal Vulnerabilities in Large Language Models: Backdoor Attacks for In-context Learningcited by 53
  15. 2023DELPHI: Data for Evaluating LLMs' Performance in Handling Controversial Issuescited by 11

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 4; 2026: 2.

8 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Fine-Tuning Lowers Safety and Disrupts Evaluation Consistency
  2. 2026Two to Tango: Coupled Task-Reference Selection for Safe LLM Fine-tuning
  3. 2025Secure LLM Fine-Tuning via Safety-Aware Probing
  4. 2025Picky LLMs and Unreliable RMs: An Empirical Study on Safety Alignment after Instruction Tuning
  5. 2026Understanding and Preserving Safety in Fine-Tuned LLMs
  6. 2024Do as I do (Safely): Mitigating Task-Specific Fine-tuning Risks in Large Language Models
  7. 2026From Parameter Dynamics to Risk Scoring : Quantifying Sample-Level Safety Degradation in LLM Fine-tuning
  8. 2025Rethinking Safety in LLM Fine-tuning: An Optimization Perspective