Overtrained, Not Misaligned
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Emergent misalignment (EM), where fine-tuning on a narrow task (like insecure code) causes broad misalignment across unrelated domains, was first demonstrated by Betley et al. (2025). We conduct the most comprehensive EM study to date, reproducing the original GPT-4o finding and expanding to 12 open-source models across 4 families (Llama, Qwen, DeepSeek, GPT-OSS) ranging from 8B to 671B parameters, evaluating over one million model responses with multiple random seeds. We find that EM replicates in GPT-4o but is far from universal: only 2 of 12 open-source models (17%) exhibit consistent EM across seeds, with a significant correlation between model size and EM susceptibility. Through checkpoint-level analysis during fine-tuning, we demonstrate that EM emerges late in training, distinct from and subsequent to near convergence of the primary task, suggesting EM emerges from continued training past task convergence. This yields practical mitigations: early stopping eliminates EM while retaining an average of 93% of task performance, and careful learning rate selection further minimizes risk. Cross-domain validation on medical fine-tuning confirms these patterns generalize: the size-EM correlation strengthens (r = 0.90), and overgeneralization to untruthfulness remains avoidable via early stopping in 67% of cases, though semantically proximate training domains produce less separable misalignment. As LLMs become increasingly integrated into real-world systems, fine-tuning and reinforcement learning remain the primary methods for adapting model behavior. Our findings demonstrate that with proper training practices, EM can be avoided, reframing it from an unforeseen fine-tuning risk to an avoidable training artifact.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 46 of its 67 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 May 2026.
Builds on
46 of 67 references.
References · 46
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,192
- 2023Judging LLM-as-a-Judge with MT-Bench and Chatbot Arenacited by 8,393
- 2025Qwen3 Technical Reportcited by 8,195
- 2024GPT-4o System Cardcited by 4,467
- 2017Outrageously Large Neural Networks: The Sparsely-Gated Mixture-of-Experts Layercited by 3,413
- 2021TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoodscited by 2,919
- 2022Self-Instruct: Aligning Language Models with Self-Generated Instructionscited by 2,674
- 2016Concrete Problems in AI Safetycited by 1,582
- 2025gpt-oss-120b & gpt-oss-20b Model Cardcited by 1,258
- 2020RealToxicityPrompts: Evaluating Neural Toxic Degeneration in Language Modelscited by 1,235
- 2023WizardLM: Empowering large pre-trained language models to follow complex instructionscited by 1,116
- 2023Fine-tuning Aligned Language Models Compromises Safety, Even When Users Do Not Intend To!cited by 1,106
34 more
- 2023Towards Understanding Sycophancy in Language Modelscited by 988
- 2021Ethical and social risks of harm from Language Modelscited by 957
- 2020StereoSet: Measuring stereotypical bias in pretrained language modelscited by 911
- 2022Discovering Language Model Behaviors with Model-Written Evaluationscited by 805
- 2023Quantifying Language Models' Sensitivity to Spurious Features in Prompt Design or: How I learned to start worrying about prompt formattingcited by 778
- 2023Whose Opinions Do Language Models Reflect?cited by 759
- 2022Transformers learn in-context by gradient descentcited by 714
- 2020Aligning AI With Shared Human Valuescited by 706
- 2020CrowS-Pairs: A Challenge Dataset for Measuring Social Biases in Masked Language Modelscited by 703
- 2021BBQ: A Hand-Built Bias Benchmark for Question Answeringcited by 683
- 2022Grokking: Generalization Beyond Overfitting on Small Algorithmic Datasetscited by 599
- 2021Dynabench: Rethinking Benchmarking in NLPcited by 447
- 2020Artificial Intelligence, Values and Alignmentcited by 443
- 2023Towards Measuring the Representation of Subjective Global Opinions in Language Modelscited by 424
- 2022ToxiGen: A Large-Scale Machine-Generated Dataset for Adversarial and Implicit Hate Speech Detectioncited by 419
- 2021BOLD: Dataset and Metrics for Measuring Biases in Open-Ended Language Generationcited by 410
- 2024A StrongREJECT for Empty Jailbreakscited by 352
- 2024Replacing Judges with Juries: Evaluating LLM Generations with a Panel of Diverse Modelscited by 301
- 2022The Alignment Problem from a Deep Learning Perspectivecited by 246
- 2024WildBench: Benchmarking LLMs with Challenging Tasks from Real Users in the Wildcited by 211
- 2023Do the Rewards Justify the Means? Measuring Trade-Offs Between Rewards and Ethical Behavior in the MACHIAVELLI Benchmarkcited by 174
- 2023Model evaluation for extreme riskscited by 167
- 2019Optimal Policies Tend to Seek Powercited by 115
- 2023Generative Language Models Exhibit Social Identity Biasescited by 107
- 2022Is Power-Seeking AI an Existential Risk?cited by 101
- 2025Subliminal Learning: Language models transmit behavioral traits via hidden signals in datacited by 89
- 2025Persona Features Control Emergent Misalignmentcited by 76
- 2025Thought Crime: Backdoors and Emergent Misalignment in Reasoning Modelscited by 57
- 2025Rating Roulette: Self-Inconsistency in LLM-As-A-Judge Frameworkscited by 37
- 2025Steering Out-of-Distribution Generalization with Concept Ablation Fine-Tuningcited by 34
- 2025Steering Language Models with Weight Arithmeticcited by 19
- 2025Re-Emergent Misalignment: How Narrow Fine-Tuning Erodes Safety Alignment in LLMscited by 9
- 2025BOSE: A Systematic Evaluation Method Optimized for Base Modelscited by 4
- 2025On the Military Applications of Large Language Modelscited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.