Low-Agreeableness Persona Conditioning for Safe LLM Fine-Tuning
On the map: LLM safety and security → Safety alignment, refusal and guardrails
Abstract (arXiv)
Recent work has shown that fine-tuning large language models (LLMs) for social warmth degrades factual reliability and increases sycophancy. We investigate a related but distinct failure mode: warmth fine-tuning also weakens adversarial safety, making models more susceptible to jailbreaks and harmful output generation. We examine whether this reflects an inherent consequence of empathetic adaptation or an artifact of data construction. To address this, we introduce a persona-driven rewriting pipeline that conditions user turns on low agreeableness and pairs this with warm, de-escalating assistant responses. Across three experiments on four models, our approach reduces jailbreak susceptibility and harmful output rates relative to generic warmth fine-tuning baselines, while preserving conversational warmth. Representational probing provides suggestive evidence that this conditioning reduces the geometric alignment between warmth and compliance directions in latent space. These results show that safer empathetic fine-tuning is achievable through data design alone, without safety labels, harm detectors, or changes to the training objective.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Safety alignment, refusal and guardrails, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. Builds on 15 of its 30 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Jun 2026.
Builds on
15 of 30 references.
Closest ancestors · 3
Same direction, newest first
- 2025Layer-Aware Representation Filtering: Purifying Finetuning Data to Preserve LLM Safety Alignment24 Jul
- 2024Robustifying Safety-Aligned Large Language Models through Clean Data Curation24 May
- 2023Fine-tuning Aligned Language Models Compromises Safety, Even When Users Do Not Intend To!5 Oct
Other references · 12
- 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,768
- 2023Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Modelscited by 2,914
- 2023RLAIF vs. RLHF: Scaling Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback with AI Feedbackcited by 615
- 2021Towards Emotional Support Dialog Systemscited by 294
- 2024Safety Layers in Aligned Large Language Models: The Key to LLM Securitycited by 126
- 2023Mechanistically analyzing the effects of fine-tuning on procedurally defined taskscited by 110
- 2023SoulChat: Improving LLMs' Empathy, Listening, and Comfort Abilities through Fine-tuning with Multi-turn Empathy Conversationscited by 109
- 2025MentalChat16K: A Benchmark Dataset for Conversational Mental Health Assistancecited by 38
- 2022Mitigating Toxic Degeneration with Empathetic Data: Exploring the Relationship Between Toxicity and Empathycited by 8
- 2025SYNTHEMPATHY: A Scalable Empathy Corpus Generated Using LLMs Without Any Crowdsourcingcited by 7
- 2025PersonaFuse: A Personality Activation-Driven Framework for Enhancing Human-LLM Interactionscited by 5
- 2026RefusalGuard: Geometry-Preserving Fine-Tuning for Safety in LLMscited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.