mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Learning to Stay Safe: Adaptive Regularization Against Safety Degradation during Fine-Tuning

arXiv 2602.17546 ↗First posted 19 Feb 2026cs.CL cs.LGcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Instruction-following language models are trained to be helpful and safe, yet their safety behavior can deteriorate under benign fine-tuning and worsen under adversarial updates. Existing defenses often offer limited protection or force a trade-off between safety and utility. We introduce a training framework that adapts regularization in response to safety risk, enabling models to remain aligned throughout fine-tuning. To estimate safety risk at training time, we explore two distinct approaches: a judge-based Safety Critic that assigns high-level harm scores to training batches, and an activation-based risk predictor built with a lightweight classifier trained on intermediate model activations to estimate harmful intent. Each approach provides a risk signal that is used to constrain updates deemed higher risk to remain close to a safe reference policy, while lower-risk updates proceed with standard training. We empirically verify that harmful intent signals are predictable from pre-generation activations and that judge scores provide effective high-recall safety guidance. Across multiple model families and attack scenarios, adaptive regularization with either risk estimation approach consistently lowers attack success rate compared to standard fine-tuning, preserves downstream performance, and adds no inference-time cost. This work demonstrates a principled mechanism for maintaining safety without sacrificing utility.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 53 of its 72 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 19 Feb 2026.

Builds on

53 of 72 references.

References · 53

  1. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
  2. 2017Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithmscited by 15,215
  3. 2021LoRA: Low-Rank Adaptation of Large Language Modelscited by 14,380
  4. 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 10,109
  5. 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 8,065
  6. 2023Efficient Memory Management for Large Language Model Serving with PagedAttentioncited by 5,944
  7. 2017Deep reinforcement learning from human preferencescited by 3,912
  8. 2023Jailbroken: How Does LLM Safety Training Fail?cited by 1,651
  9. 2024HarmBench: A Standardized Evaluation Framework for Automated Red Teaming and Robust Refusalcited by 1,429
  10. 2024A Survey on LLM-as-a-Judgecited by 1,423
  11. 2023Fine-tuning Aligned Language Models Compromises Safety, Even When Users Do Not Intend To!cited by 1,154
  12. 2023BeaverTails: Towards Improved Safety Alignment of LLM via a Human-Preference Datasetcited by 860
38 more
  1. 2024Safety Alignment Should Be Made More Than Just a Few Tokens Deepcited by 472
  2. 2023Catastrophic Jailbreak of Open-source LLMs via Exploiting Generationcited by 451
  3. 2023Shadow Alignment: The Ease of Subverting Safely-Aligned Language Modelscited by 297
  4. 2024SORRY-Bench: Systematically Evaluating Large Language Model Safety Refusalcited by 240
  5. 2024Assessing the Brittleness of Safety Alignment via Pruning and Low-Rank Modificationscited by 231
  6. 2023LoRA Fine-tuning Efficiently Undoes Safety Training in Llama 2-Chat 70Bcited by 195
  7. 2023Removing RLHF Protections in GPT-4 via Fine-Tuningcited by 171
  8. 2024Tamper-Resistant Safeguards for Open-Weight LLMscited by 138
  9. 2025Safety Tax: Safety Alignment Makes Your Large Reasoning Models Less Reasonablecited by 122
  10. 2024What is in Your Safe Data? Identifying Benign Data that Breaks Safetycited by 118
  11. 2024Vaccine: Perturbation-aware Alignment for Large Language Models against Harmful Fine-tuning Attackcited by 115
  12. 2022Why Should Adversarial Perturbations be Imperceptible? Rethink the Research Paradigm in Adversarial NLPcited by 102
  13. 2023Fine-tuning can cripple your foundation model; preserving features may be the solutioncited by 96
  14. 2024Representation Noising: A Defence Mechanism Against Harmful Finetuningcited by 96
  15. 2024Lisa: Lazy Safety Alignment for Large Language Models against Harmful Fine-tuning Attackcited by 92
  16. 2024Booster: Tackling Harmful Fine-tuning for Large Language Models via Attenuating Harmful Perturbationcited by 92
  17. 2024Harmful Fine-tuning Attacks and Defenses for Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 90
  18. 2024Covert Malicious Finetuning: Challenges in Safeguarding LLM Adaptationcited by 80
  19. 2025Towards LLM Unlearning Resilient to Relearning Attacks: A Sharpness-Aware Minimization Perspective and Beyondcited by 79
  20. 2024Antidote: Post-fine-tuning Safety Alignment for Large Language Models against Harmful Fine-tuningcited by 72
  21. 2024What Makes and Breaks Safety Fine-tuning? A Mechanistic Studycited by 55
  22. 2024Navigating the Safety Landscape: Measuring Risks in Finetuning Large Language Modelscited by 46
  23. 2024Robustifying Safety-Aligned Large Language Models through Clean Data Curationcited by 44
  24. 2025Model Tampering Attacks Enable More Rigorous Evaluations of LLM Capabilitiescited by 39
  25. 2024Targeted Vaccine: Safety Alignment for Large Language Models against Harmful Fine-Tuning via Layer-wise Perturbationcited by 37
  26. 2024Insights into LLM Long-Context Failures: When Transformers Know but Don't Tellcited by 36
  27. 2024Immunization against harmful fine-tuning attackscited by 35
  28. 2024Towards Understanding the Fragility of Multilingual LLMs against Fine-Tuning Attackscited by 33
  29. 2024No Two Devils Alike: Unveiling Distinct Mechanisms of Fine-tuning Attackscited by 29
  30. 2025Virus: Harmful Fine-tuning Attack for Large Language Models Bypassing Guardrail Moderationcited by 29
  31. 2025SafeSwitch: Steering Unsafe LLM Behavior via Internal Activation Signalscited by 29
  32. 2025Benign Samples Matter! Fine-tuning On Outlier Benign Samples Severely Breaks Safetycited by 22
  33. 2024The VLLM Safety Paradox: Dual Ease in Jailbreak Attack and Defensecited by 21
  34. 2025PIShield: Detecting Prompt Injection Attacks via Intrinsic LLM Featurescited by 20
  35. 2024Emerging Safety Attack and Defense in Federated Instruction Tuning of Large Language Modelscited by 18
  36. 2025Fundamental Safety-Capability Trade-offs in Fine-tuning Large Language Modelscited by 17
  37. 2025CTRAP: Embedding Collapse Trap to Safeguard Large Language Models from Harmful Fine-Tuningcited by 11
  38. 2025Shape it Up! Restoring LLM Safety during Finetuningcited by 11

50 most cited of 53 All 53 (JSON)

Built on by

Not cited yet.