mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Utilize the Flow before Stepping into the Same River Twice: Certainty Represented Knowledge Flow for Refusal-Aware Instruction Tuning

arXiv 2410.06913 ↗First posted 9 Oct 2024cs.CLcited by 10

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

Abstract (arXiv)

Refusal-Aware Instruction Tuning (RAIT) enables Large Language Models (LLMs) to refuse to answer unknown questions. By modifying responses of unknown questions in the training data to refusal responses such as "I don't know", RAIT enhances the reliability of LLMs and reduces their hallucination. Generally, RAIT modifies training samples based on the correctness of the initial LLM's response. However, this crude approach can cause LLMs to excessively refuse answering questions they could have correctly answered, the problem we call over-refusal. In this paper, we explore two primary causes of over-refusal: Static conflict occurs when similar samples within the LLM's feature space receive differing supervision signals (original vs. modified "I don't know"). Dynamic conflict arises as the LLM's evolving knowledge during SFT enables it to answer previously unanswerable questions, but the now-answerable training samples still retain the original "I don't know" supervision signals from the initial LLM state, leading to inconsistencies. These conflicts cause the trained LLM to misclassify known questions as unknown, resulting in over-refusal. To address this issue, we introduce Certainty Represented Knowledge Flow for Refusal-Aware Instructions Tuning (CRaFT). CRaFT centers on two main contributions: First, we additionally incorporate response certainty to selectively filter and modify data, reducing static conflicts. Second, we implement preliminary rehearsal training to characterize changes in the LLM's knowledge state, which helps mitigate dynamic conflicts during the fine-tuning process. We conducted extensive experiments on open-ended question answering and multiple-choice question task. Experiment results show that CRaFT can improve LLM's overall performance during the RAIT process. Code and data will be released at https://github.com/opendatalab/CRaFT .

Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Safety alignment, refusal and guardrails, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. Builds on 21 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Oct 2024.

Builds on

21 of 31 references.

References · 21

  1. 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,192
  2. 2021LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Modelscited by 14,084
  3. 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 12,865
  4. 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,768
  5. 2018Think you have Solved Question Answering? Try ARC, the AI2 Reasoning Challengecited by 4,710
  6. 2020Dense Passage Retrieval for Open-Domain Question Answeringcited by 3,779
  7. 2017TriviaQA: A Large Scale Distantly Supervised Challenge Dataset for Reading Comprehensioncited by 2,895
  8. 2019The Curious Case of Neural Text Degenerationcited by 2,881
  9. 2024Qwen2 Technical Reportcited by 2,076
  10. 2023Inference-Time Intervention: Eliciting Truthful Answers from a Language Modelcited by 1,259
  11. 2023DoLa: Decoding by Contrasting Layers Improves Factuality in Large Language Modelscited by 367
  12. 2024Does Fine-Tuning LLMs on New Knowledge Encourage Hallucinations?cited by 227
9 more
  1. 2024Don't Hallucinate, Abstain: Identifying LLM Knowledge Gaps via Multi-LLM Collaborationcited by 176
  2. 2024Know Your Limits: A Survey of Abstention in Large Language Modelscited by 116
  3. 2022DisentQA: Disentangling Parametric and Contextual Knowledge with Counterfactual Question Answeringcited by 93
  4. 2024Unfamiliar Finetuning Examples Control How Language Models Hallucinatecited by 85
  5. 2023Alignment for Honestycited by 72
  6. 2024Rejection Improves Reliability: Training LLMs to Refuse Unknown Questions Using RL from Knowledge Feedbackcited by 64
  7. 2024Learning or Self-aligning? Rethinking Instruction Fine-tuningcited by 43
  8. 2023Uncertainty Quantification via Spatial-Temporal Tweedie Model for Zero-inflated and Long-tail Travel Demand Predictioncited by 19
  9. 2024Efficient Preference-based Reinforcement Learning via Aligned Experience Estimationcited by 9

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 3; 2026: 5.

10 papers.