Few Tokens, Big Leverage: Preserving Safety Alignment by Constraining Safety Tokens during Fine-tuning
On the map: LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation → Safety alignment and jailbreak attacks
also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language models (LLMs) often require fine-tuning (FT) to perform well on downstream tasks, but FT can induce safety-alignment drift even when the training dataset contains only benign data. Prior work shows that introducing a small fraction of harmful data can substantially compromise LLM refusal behavior, causing LLMs to comply with harmful requests. Existing defense methods often rely on model-wide interventions, such as restricting which parameters are updated or injecting additional safety data, which can limit generality and degrade downstream task performance. To address these limitations, we propose a fine-tuning framework called Preserving Safety Alignment via Constrained Tokens (PACT), which stabilizes the model's confidence on safety tokens. Our approach is motivated by the empirical observation that safety-aligned behavior is reflected in the model's token-level output confidence and is often concentrated on a small subset of safety-related tokens. During downstream fine-tuning, we regularize the fine-tuned model to match the aligned reference model's confidence on safety-related tokens at each response step, while leaving non-safety tokens largely unconstrained to allow effective task adaptation. This targeted constraint prevents alignment drift without imposing global restrictions that typically trade off with model utility. Our code is available at {https://github.com/Glresearch1/PACT}.
Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Safety alignment and jailbreak attacks, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation. Builds on 24 of its 45 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Mar 2026.
Builds on
24 of 45 references.
Closest ancestors · 11
Same direction, newest first
- 2024NLSR: Neuron-Level Safety Realignment of Large Language Models Against Harmful Fine-Tuning17 Dec
- 2024Antidote: Post-fine-tuning Safety Alignment for Large Language Models against Harmful Fine-tuning18 Aug
- 2024PKU-SafeRLHF: Towards Multi-Level Safety Alignment for LLMs with Human Preference20 Jun
- 2024Safety Alignment Should Be Made More Than Just a Few Tokens Deep10 Jun
- 2024Lisa: Lazy Safety Alignment for Large Language Models against Harmful Fine-tuning Attack28 May
- 2023Removing RLHF Protections in GPT-4 via Fine-Tuning9 Nov
- 2023LoRA Fine-tuning Efficiently Undoes Safety Training in Llama 2-Chat 70B31 Oct
- 2023Fine-tuning Aligned Language Models Compromises Safety, Even When Users Do Not Intend To!5 Oct
- 2023Shadow Alignment: The Ease of Subverting Safely-Aligned Language Models4 Oct
- 2023Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Models27 Jul
- 2023BeaverTails: Towards Improved Safety Alignment of LLM via a Human-Preference Dataset10 Jul
Other references · 13
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
- 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 13,028
- 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 10,109
- 2023Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Modelcited by 8,065
- 2021Finetuned Language Models Are Zero-Shot Learnerscited by 3,780
- 2015Character-level Convolutional Networks for Text Classificationcited by 2,330
- 2023LIMA: Less Is More for Alignmentcited by 1,100
- 2024A StrongREJECT for Empty Jailbreakscited by 385
- 2024Latent Adversarial Training Improves Robustness to Persistent Harmful Behaviors in LLMscited by 173
- 2023Bypassing the Safety Training of Open-Source LLMs with Priming Attackscited by 50
- 2024Mitigating Fine-tuning based Jailbreak Attack with Backdoor Enhanced Safety Alignmentcited by 31
- 2024Nudging: Inference-time Alignment of LLMs via Guided Decodingcited by 23
1 more
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 4.
4 papers.
- 2026Multilingual Safety Alignment via Self-Distillationcited by 3
- 2026Ablating Safety: Mechanisms for Removing Alignment in Language Models for Security Applicationscited by 1
- 2026Beyond Token Positions: Safety Alignment Across Denoising Steps in Diffusion Language Modelscited by 0
- 2026SafeRI: Recognition and Intervention for Token-Level Safety Intervention in Large Vision Language Modelscited by 0
- 2026SafeRI: Recognition and Intervention for Token-Level Safety Intervention in Large Vision Language Models3 Sep 2026
- 2026Beyond Token Positions: Safety Alignment Across Denoising Steps in Diffusion Language Models31 Aug 2026
- 2026Ablating Safety: Mechanisms for Removing Alignment in Language Models for Security Applications17 May 2026
- 2026Multilingual Safety Alignment via Self-Distillation3 May 2026
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2024Locking Down the Finetuned LLMs Safety
- 2026Understanding and Preserving Safety in Fine-Tuned LLMs
- 2026Safety at One Shot: Patching Fine-Tuned LLMs with A Single Instance
- 2026Guardrails in Logit Space: Safety Token Regularization for LLM Alignment
- 2025Fine-Tuning Lowers Safety and Disrupts Evaluation Consistency
- 2025SafeMERGE: Preserving Safety Alignment in Fine-Tuned Large Language Models via Selective Layer-Wise Model Merging
- 2025Picky LLMs and Unreliable RMs: An Empirical Study on Safety Alignment after Instruction Tuning
- 2026Aligned but Fragile: Enhancing LLM Safety Robustness via Zeroth-Order Optimization