mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Quantized Delta Weight Is Safety Keeper

arXiv 2411.19530 ↗First posted 29 Nov 2024cs.CR cs.AI cs.LGcited by 12

On the map: LLM safety and security → Jailbreaking

Abstract (arXiv)

Recent advancements in fine-tuning proprietary language models enable customized applications across various domains but also introduce two major challenges: high resource demands and security risks. Regarding resource demands, recent work proposes novel partial compression, such as BitDelta, to quantize the delta weights between the fine-tuned model and base model. Regarding the security risks, user-defined fine-tuning can introduce security vulnerabilities, such as alignment issues, backdoor attacks, and hallucinations. However, most of the current efforts in security assessment focus on the full-precision or full-compression models, it is not well-discussed how the partial compression methods affect security concerns. To bridge this gap, we evaluate the robustness of delta-weight quantization against these security threats. In this paper, we uncover a "free lunch" phenomenon: partial compression can enhance model security against fine-tuning-based attacks with bearable utility loss. Using Llama-2-7b-chat as a case study, we show that, with under 10% utility degradation, the partial compression mitigates alignment-breaking risks by up to 66.17%, harmful backdoor vulnerabilities by 64.46%, and targeted output manipulation risks by up to 90.53%. We further apply LogitLens to visualize internal state transformations during forward passes, suggesting mechanisms for both security failure and recovery in standard versus compressed fine-tuning. This work offers new insights into selecting effective delta compression methods for secure, resource-efficient multi-tenant services.

Key facts. Cited by 12 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Jailbreaking, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. Builds on 43 of its 60 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 Nov 2024.

Builds on

43 of 60 references.

Closest ancestors · 6

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024Jailbreak Attacks and Defenses Against Large Language Models: A Survey5 Jul
  2. 2024How Alignment and Jailbreak Work: Explain LLM Safety through Intermediate Hidden States9 Jun
  3. 2024Defending LLMs against Jailbreaking Attacks via Backtranslation26 Feb
  4. 2024A Comprehensive Study of Jailbreak Attack versus Defense for Large Language Models21 Feb
  5. 2023Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Models27 Jul
  6. 2023Jailbroken: How Does LLM Safety Training Fail?5 Jul

Other references · 37

  1. 2018BERT: Pre-training of Deep Bidirectional Transformers for Language Understandingcited by 40,204
  2. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,712
  3. 2021LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Modelscited by 14,084
  4. 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 12,865
  5. 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,302
  6. 2023Improved Baselines with Visual Instruction Tuningcited by 4,362
  7. 2023QLoRA: Efficient Finetuning of Quantized LLMscited by 3,355
  8. 2023Qwen Technical Reportcited by 3,273
  9. 2023Mistral 7Bcited by 3,065
  10. 2017TriviaQA: A Large Scale Distantly Supervised Challenge Dataset for Reading Comprehensioncited by 2,895
  11. 2023MiniGPT-4: Enhancing Vision-Language Understanding with Advanced Large Language Modelscited by 2,689
  12. 2022Survey of Hallucination in Natural Language Generationcited by 2,056
25 more
  1. 2022GPTQ: Accurate Post-Training Quantization for Generative Pre-trained Transformerscited by 1,838
  2. 2023Fine-tuning Aligned Language Models Compromises Safety, Even When Users Do Not Intend To!cited by 1,106
  3. 2017BadNets: Identifying Vulnerabilities in the Machine Learning Model Supply Chaincited by 1,052
  4. 2023BeaverTails: Towards Improved Safety Alignment of LLM via a Human-Preference Datasetcited by 828
  5. 2023PyTorch FSDP: Experiences on Scaling Fully Sharded Data Parallelcited by 641
  6. 2020Backdoor Learning: A Surveycited by 412
  7. 2023LongLoRA: Efficient Fine-tuning of Long-Context Large Language Modelscited by 243
  8. 2023Fine-tuning Language Models for Factualitycited by 219
  9. 2019A backdoor attack against LSTM-based text classification systemscited by 214
  10. 2023S-LoRA: Serving Thousands of Concurrent LoRA Adapterscited by 146
  11. 2023Backdooring Instruction-Tuned Large Language Models with Virtual Prompt Injectioncited by 143
  12. 2023From ChatGPT to ThreatGPT: Impact of Generative AI in Cybersecurity and Privacycited by 137
  13. 2024Unfamiliar Finetuning Examples Control How Language Models Hallucinatecited by 85
  14. 2023Punica: Multi-Tenant LoRA Servingcited by 80
  15. 2021BadPre: Task-agnostic Backdoor Attacks to Pre-trained NLP Foundation Modelscited by 76
  16. 2022Revisiting Parameter-Efficient Tuning: Are We Really There Yet?cited by 76
  17. 2024Decoding Compressed Trust: Scrutinizing the Trustworthiness of Efficient LLMs Under Compressioncited by 54
  18. 2022SSLGuard: A Watermarking Scheme for Self-supervised Learning Pre-trained Encoderscited by 43
  19. 2024Detecting Hallucinations in Large Language Model Generation: A Token Probability Approachcited by 40
  20. 2024BitDelta: Your Fine-Tune May Only Be Worth One Bitcited by 38
  21. 2023You Only Prompt Once: On the Capabilities of Prompt Learning on Large Language Models to Tackle Toxic Contentcited by 37
  22. 2024A Survey of Recent Backdoor Attacks and Defenses in Large Language Modelscited by 36
  23. 2024Measuring and Reducing LLM Hallucination without Gold-Standard Answerscited by 31
  24. 2024LoRATK: LoRA Once, Backdoor Everywhere in the Share-and-Play Ecosystemcited by 22
  25. 2024PEFTGuard: Detecting Backdoor Attacks Against Parameter-Efficient Fine-Tuningcited by 22

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 9; 2026: 1.

12 papers.