mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

DataShield: Safety-degrading Data Filtering for LLM Benign Instruction Fine-Tuning

arXiv 2606.00160 ↗First posted 29 May 2026cs.CR cs.AI cs.CLcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models (LLMs) suffer from degraded safety capabilities even when fine-tuned with benign datasets. However, existing methods for identifying safety-degrading samples in benign datasets suffer from high computational costs and significant noise issues. In this paper, we propose DataShield to efficiently and effectively identify potential safety-degrading samples. Our key intuition is based on the observation that benign fine-tuning increases the overall response compliance of LLMs. DataShield's key technical insight is to quantify each sample's contribution to the model's compliance behavior as its safety degradation score. DataShield consists of three core components: (1) Compliance Vector Extraction, which captures the LLM's compliance behavior tendency; (2) a novel Compliance-Aware Score (CAS), which automatically identifies the optimal safety-critical layer; and (3) Safety-degrading Sample Filtering, which quantifies the projection shift of training data along the compliance direction. Extensive experimental evaluation on Llama3-8B, Llama3.1-8B, and Qwen2.5-7B using the Alpaca and Dolly benign datasets validates our method's effectiveness in identifying high-risk and low-risk data subsets. We also observe that open-ended question answering is more likely to trigger safety degradation, and corresponding responses tend to be longer. We hope this work can provide new insights into data-centric defense methods. The source code is available at: https://github.com/ZJunBo/DataShield.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 38 of its 45 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 29 May 2026.

Builds on

38 of 45 references.

References · 38

  1. 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
  2. 2024Qwen2.5 Technical Reportcited by 4,942
  3. 2023Jailbroken: How Does LLM Safety Training Fail?cited by 1,651
  4. 2024HarmBench: A Standardized Evaluation Framework for Automated Red Teaming and Robust Refusalcited by 1,429
  5. 2023Representation Engineering: A Top-Down Approach to AI Transparencycited by 1,336
  6. 2023Fine-tuning Aligned Language Models Compromises Safety, Even When Users Do Not Intend To!cited by 1,154
  7. 2023Steering Llama 2 via Contrastive Activation Additioncited by 1,085
  8. 2024Refusal in Language Models Is Mediated by a Single Directioncited by 1,032
  9. 2023XSTest: A Test Suite for Identifying Exaggerated Safety Behaviours in Large Language Modelscited by 505
  10. 2024Safety Alignment Should Be Made More Than Just a Few Tokens Deepcited by 472
  11. 2022A Holistic Approach to Undesired Content Detection in the Real Worldcited by 356
  12. 2025Persona Vectors: Monitoring and Controlling Character Traits in Language Modelscited by 345
26 more
  1. 2024Improving Alignment and Robustness with Circuit Breakerscited by 322
  2. 2023Shadow Alignment: The Ease of Subverting Safely-Aligned Language Modelscited by 297
  3. 2024Assessing the Brittleness of Safety Alignment via Pruning and Low-Rank Modificationscited by 231
  4. 2024SALAD-Bench: A Hierarchical and Comprehensive Safety Benchmark for Large Language Modelscited by 228
  5. 2024WildTeaming at Scale: From In-the-Wild Jailbreaks to (Adversarially) Safer Language Modelscited by 223
  6. 2024Programming Refusal with Conditional Activation Steeringcited by 206
  7. 2023LoRA Fine-tuning Efficiently Undoes Safety Training in Llama 2-Chat 70Bcited by 195
  8. 2023Removing RLHF Protections in GPT-4 via Fine-Tuningcited by 171
  9. 2024Safety Layers in Aligned Large Language Models: The Key to LLM Securitycited by 134
  10. 2024Safe LoRA: the Silver Lining of Reducing Safety Risks when Fine-tuning Large Language Modelscited by 125
  11. 2024What is in Your Safe Data? Identifying Benign Data that Breaks Safetycited by 118
  12. 2024Vaccine: Perturbation-aware Alignment for Large Language Models against Harmful Fine-tuning Attackcited by 115
  13. 2024GradSafe: Detecting Jailbreak Prompts for LLMs via Safety-Critical Gradient Analysiscited by 96
  14. 2024Keeping LLMs Aligned After Fine-tuning: The Crucial Role of Prompt Templatescited by 96
  15. 2024Harmful Fine-tuning Attacks and Defenses for Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 90
  16. 2025LLMs Encode Harmfulness and Refusal Separatelycited by 88
  17. 2023AI model GPT-3 (dis)informs us better than humanscited by 78
  18. 2024SEAL: Safety-enhanced Aligned LLM Fine-tuning via Bilevel Data Selectioncited by 64
  19. 2024Targeted Vaccine: Safety Alignment for Large Language Models against Harmful Fine-Tuning via Layer-wise Perturbationcited by 37
  20. 2023BadLlama: cheaply removing safety fine-tuning from Llama 2-Chat 13Bcited by 36
  21. 2025Representation Bending for Large Language Model Safetycited by 30
  22. 2026Locate, Steer, and Improve: A Practical Survey of Actionable Mechanistic Interpretability in Large Language Modelscited by 27
  23. 2025Layer-Aware Representation Filtering: Purifying Finetuning Data to Preserve LLM Safety Alignmentcited by 24
  24. 2025Dialogue Injection Attack: Jailbreaking LLMs through Context Manipulationcited by 14
  25. 2025MetaDefense: Defending Finetuning-based Jailbreak Attack Before and During Generationcited by 8
  26. 2025Refining Positive and Toxic Samples for Dual Safety Self-Alignment of LLMs with Minimal Human Interventionscited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.