Intrinsic Guardrails: How Semantic Geometry of Personality Interacts with Emergent Misalignment in LLMs
On the map: LLM safety and security → Safety alignment, refusal and guardrails
Abstract (arXiv)
Fine-tuning Large Language Models (LLMs) on benign narrow data can sometimes induce broad harmful behaviors, a vulnerability termed emergent misalignment (EM). While prior work links these failures to specific directions in the activation space, their relationship to the model's broader persona remains unexplored. We map the latent personality space of LLMs through established psychometric profiles like the Big Five, Dark Triad, and LLM-specific behaviors (e.g. evil, sycophancy), and show that the semantic geometry is highly stable across aligned models and their corrupted fine-tunes. Through causal interventions, we find that directions isolating social valence, such as the 'Evil' persona vector, and a Semantic Valence Vector (SVV) that we introduce, function as intrinsic guardrails: ablating them drives the misalignment rates above 40%, while amplifying them suppresses the failure mode to less than 3%. Leveraging the structural stability of the personality space, we show that vectors extracted textita priori from an instruct-tuned model transfer zero-shot to successfully regulate EM in corrupted fine-tunes. Overall, our findings suggest that harmful fine-tuning does not overwrite a model's internal representation of personality, allowing conserved representations to serve as robust, cross-distribution guardrails.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Safety alignment, refusal and guardrails, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. Builds on 13 of its 38 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 May 2026.
Builds on
13 of 38 references.
Closest ancestors · 2
Same direction, newest first
- 2024Refusal in Language Models Is Mediated by a Single Direction17 Jun
- 2024Assessing the Brittleness of Safety Alignment via Pruning and Low-Rank Modifications7 Feb
Other references · 11
- 2023Steering Language Models With Activation Engineeringcited by 922
- 2023The Linear Representation Hypothesis and the Geometry of Large Language Modelscited by 716
- 2023Similarity of Neural Network Models: A Survey of Functional and Representational Measurescited by 131
- 2022Evaluating and Inducing Personality in Pre-trained Language Modelscited by 123
- 2026The Assistant Axis: Situating and Stabilizing the Default Persona of Language Modelscited by 90
- 2025Convergent Linear Representations of Emergent Misalignmentcited by 71
- 2024Do LLMs Have Distinct and Consistent Personality? TRAIT: Personality Testset designed for LLMs with Psychometricscited by 59
- 2026Emotion Concepts and their Function in a Large Language Modelcited by 57
- 2023Personas as a Way to Model Truthfulness in Language Modelscited by 47
- 2026Valence-Arousal Subspace in LLMs: Circular Emotion Geometry and Multi-Behavioral Controlcited by 16
- 2024Identifying and Manipulating Personality Traits in LLMs Through Activation Engineeringcited by 14
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Characterizing the Consistency of the Emergent Misalignment Persona
- 2025The Geometry of Persona: Disentangling Personality from Reasoning in Large Language Models
- 2025Activation-Space Personality Steering: Hybrid Layer Selection for Stable Trait Control in LLMs
- 2026Do Personality Traits Interfere? Geometric Limitations of Steering in Large Language Models
- 2026Data Attribution of Emergent Misalignment with Persona Features
- 2026PTCBENCH: Benchmarking Contextual Stability of Personality Traits in LLM Systems
- 2026Persona-Model Collapse in Emergent Misalignment
- 2026Character as a Latent Variable in Large Language Models: A Mechanistic Account of Emergent Misalignment and Conditional Safety Failures