mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Unsupervised Identification and Removal of Spurious Correlations During Fine-Tuning

arXiv 2605.27676 ↗First posted 26 May 2026stat.ML cs.LGcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Fine-tuning a pretrained language model on a curated dataset can produce spurious correlations between the fine-tuning task and unintended latent factors---such as misaligned personas or political slant---that the curation procedure has entangled with the task. The model can latch onto these spurious correlations, leading to bias and reduced out-of-distribution generalisation. We prove that under reasonable assumptions on task complexity and the spurious correlation, such latent factors can be identified, without supervision, from the weights of a naive LoRA fine-tune. Existing approaches to removing bias, such as activation steering, remove identified factors from residual-stream activations, either at inference or during training. We argue, however, that the goal should be to remove the spurious correlation, not the latent factor itself, as the pretrained model may rely on it for genuine task signal. To enable this, we propose GRASP, GRadient projection of Associated Spurious Patterns, which prevents the model from acquiring new reliance on the identified latent factor while preserving any pretrained content along it. We validate on three fine-tuning tasks. The first two involve emergent misalignment, where fine-tuning on a narrow task---in our case, writing insecure code and giving bad medical advice---leads to misaligned responses on unrelated topics. Here our method completely removes misalignment in the insecure code case and reduces it by ~5x in the bad medical advice case, beating all baselines in the trade-off between misalignment-reduction and task-preservation. The last is a novel political-bias experiment, where fine-tuning on right-skewed Reddit financial-advice data causes political-lean drift on unrelated topics. Here our method reduces drift by more than half, while improving financial task performance, beating all baselines.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 9 of its 15 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 May 2026.

Builds on

9 of 15 references.

References · 9

  1. 2020Shortcut Learning in Deep Neural Networkscited by 1,969
  2. 2019Invariant Risk Minimizationcited by 1,854
  3. 2023Inference-Time Intervention: Eliciting Truthful Answers from a Language Modelcited by 1,302
  4. 2019Distributionally Robust Neural Networks for Group Shifts: On the Importance of Regularization for Worst-Case Generalizationcited by 1,247
  5. 2021Just Train Twice: Improving Group Robustness without Training Group Informationcited by 523
  6. 2023LEACE: Perfect linear concept erasure in closed formcited by 267
  7. 2022Linear Adversarial Concept Erasurecited by 101
  8. 2025Model Organisms for Emergent Misalignmentcited by 91
  9. 2025Convergent Linear Representations of Emergent Misalignmentcited by 71

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026A Mechanistic Investigation of Supervised Fine Tuning
  2. 2026MoRFI: Monotonic Sparse Autoencoder Feature Identification
  3. 2025Leaner Training, Lower Leakage: Revisiting Memorization in LLM Fine-Tuning with LoRA
  4. 2024Dissecting Fine-Tuning Unlearning in Large Language Models
  5. 2026Are Parameter-Efficient Fine-tuning Methods Really Different?
  6. 2025Memorization in Fine-Tuned Large Language Models
  7. 2025Assessing Robustness to Spurious Correlations in Post-Training Language Models
  8. 2026Diversity in Large Language Models under Supervised Fine-Tuning