Stop Early, Spend Less: Hidden-State Probes as a Practical Recipe for Streaming Moderation of LLM Outputs
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Deploying large language models in user-facing systems requires efficient output safety filtering. Existing approaches typically rely on a separate moderation model applied after generation, which doubles inference cost and only detects violations after generation completes. We observe that the signal needed for moderation is already present in the model hidden states. Based on this, we train lightweight token-level probes that operate directly on internal activations, producing per-token safety scores that can be aggregated for both offline evaluation and online intervention. The probe reuses activations from the generator and requires no additional forward pass, enabling sub millisecond per-token safety checks inside the decoding loop. A probe applied to a single mid layer recovers most decisions of a strong guard model, acting as a low cost surrogate optimized for latency rather than accuracy. In streaming settings, it can halt or modify unsafe outputs before they are fully generated, replacing end of sequence moderation with continuous token level monitoring. Compared to post hoc and streaming guard models, our method achieves orders of magnitude lower compute overhead with minimal latency cost. We also provide a practical deployment recipe, including layer selection, aggregation strategy, probing frequency, and triggering thresholds. Finally, we show that the probe linear component corresponds to a direction in residual space, enabling both detection and activation steering at negligible cost.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 16 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 9 Jun 2026.
Builds on
14 of 16 references.
References · 14
- 2023Efficient Memory Management for Large Language Model Serving with PagedAttentioncited by 5,944
- 2016Understanding intermediate layers using linear classifier probescited by 1,353
- 2023Representation Engineering: A Top-Down Approach to AI Transparencycited by 1,336
- 2023Inference-Time Intervention: Eliciting Truthful Answers from a Language Modelcited by 1,302
- 2023Llama Guard: LLM-based Input-Output Safeguard for Human-AI Conversationscited by 1,207
- 2019BERT Rediscovers the Classical NLP Pipelinecited by 1,059
- 2023BeaverTails: Towards Improved Safety Alignment of LLM via a Human-Preference Datasetcited by 860
- 2022Discovering Latent Knowledge in Language Models Without Supervisioncited by 767
- 2023NeMo Guardrails: A Toolkit for Controllable and Safe LLM Applications with Programmable Railscited by 365
- 2022A Holistic Approach to Undesired Content Detection in the Real Worldcited by 356
- 2023ToxicChat: Unveiling Hidden Challenges of Toxicity Detection in Real-World User-AI Conversationcited by 231
- 2025Constitutional Classifiers: Defending against Universal Jailbreaks across Thousands of Hours of Red Teamingcited by 181
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Speculative Probing: LLM Monitoring at Speculative-Decoding Cost
- 2026Segment-Level Coherence for Robust Harmful Intent Probing in LLMs
- 2025From Judgment to Interference: Early Stopping LLM Harmful Outputs via Streaming Content Monitoring
- 2024PrimeGuard: Safe and Helpful LLMs through Tuning-Free Routing
- 2026Predict, Don't React: Value-Based Safety Forecasting for LLM Streaming
- 2026Getting the Parameters Right: A Difficulty-Graded Benchmark and Probe-Guided Training for LLM Tool Calls
- 2025Activation Approximations Can Incur Safety Vulnerabilities Even in Aligned LLMs: Comprehensive Analysis and Defense
- 2026Compute Where it Counts: Self Optimizing Language Models