Robust Harmful Features Under Jailbreak Attacks: Mechanistic Evidence from Attention Head Specialization in Large Language Models
On the map: LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation → Safety alignment and jailbreak attacks
also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)
Jailbreak attacks bypass LLM safety alignment, yet their mechanisms remain poorly understood. We provide evidence that attacks do not comprehensively eliminate safety features, but instead selectively suppress specific attention heads. We identify two functionally differentiated types: Adversarially Compromised Heads (ACHs) concentrated in early layers, which are suppressed under attacks, and Safety-Aligned Heads (SAHs) in mid-layers, which maintain robust activations even when attacks succeed. Ablation studies support the causal role of ACHs and the contribution of SAHs to robust activations: suppressing a small number of ACHs is sufficient to induce jailbreak-like behavior on normally refused inputs, while removing SAHs substantially weakens mid-layer safety activations. Token-level attribution further shows that ACH suppression is driven specifically by attack-template tokens, providing a mechanistic account of why attacks can bypass refusal decisions through ACH suppression while leaving internal safety signals sustained by SAHs -- a phenomenon we term Robust Harmful Features. To validate the practical significance of this robustness, we show that simply reading these persistent activations -- without any training -- yields competitive aggregate detection performance with strong adversarial robustness.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Safety alignment and jailbreak attacks, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation. Builds on 34 of its 46 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Jun 2026.
Builds on
34 of 46 references.
Closest ancestors · 6
Same direction, newest first
- 2025Understanding Refusal in Language Models with Sparse Autoencoders29 May
- 2025The Geometry of Refusal in Large Language Models: Concept Cones and Representational Independence24 Feb
- 2024Safety Layers in Aligned Large Language Models: The Key to LLM Security30 Aug
- 2024How Alignment and Jailbreak Work: Explain LLM Safety through Intermediate Hidden States9 Jun
- 2024OR-Bench: An Over-Refusal Benchmark for Large Language Models31 May
- 2023Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Models27 Jul
Other references · 28
- 2017Axiomatic Attribution for Deep Networkscited by 3,384
- 2024HarmBench: A Standardized Evaluation Framework for Automated Red Teaming and Robust Refusalcited by 1,429
- 2023Jailbreaking Black Box Large Language Models in Twenty Queriescited by 1,420
- 2020Transformer Feed-Forward Layers Are Key-Value Memoriescited by 1,336
- 2023Llama Guard: LLM-based Input-Output Safeguard for Human-AI Conversationscited by 1,207
- 2024Refusal in Language Models Is Mediated by a Single Directioncited by 1,032
- 2022In-context Learning and Induction Headscited by 964
- 2023Progress measures for grokking via mechanistic interpretabilitycited by 839
- 2023Towards Automated Circuit Discovery for Mechanistic Interpretabilitycited by 724
- 2024WildGuard: Open One-Stop Moderation Tools for Safety Risks, Jailbreaks, and Refusals of LLMscited by 496
- 2023SmoothLLM: Defending Large Language Models Against Jailbreaking Attackscited by 469
- 2023Catastrophic Jailbreak of Open-source LLMs via Exploiting Generationcited by 451
16 more
- 2024Sparse Feature Circuits: Discovering and Editing Interpretable Causal Graphs in Language Modelscited by 435
- 2023Detecting Language Model Attacks with Perplexitycited by 431
- 2024Mechanistic Interpretability for AI Safety -- A Reviewcited by 422
- 2022A Holistic Approach to Undesired Content Detection in the Real Worldcited by 356
- 2024Improving Alignment and Robustness with Circuit Breakerscited by 322
- 2024SafeDecoding: Defending against Jailbreak Attacks via Safety-Aware Decodingcited by 247
- 2023ToxicChat: Unveiling Hidden Challenges of Toxicity Detection in Real-World User-AI Conversationcited by 231
- 2024SALAD-Bench: A Hierarchical and Comprehensive Safety Benchmark for Large Language Modelscited by 228
- 2024WildTeaming at Scale: From In-the-Wild Jailbreaks to (Adversarially) Safer Language Modelscited by 223
- 2024Programming Refusal with Conditional Activation Steeringcited by 206
- 2025Aegis2.0: A Diverse AI Safety Dataset and Risks Taxonomy for Alignment of LLM Guardrailscited by 132
- 2024Llama Guard 3 Vision: Safeguarding Human-AI Image Understanding Conversationscited by 129
- 2023Copy Suppression: Comprehensively Understanding an Attention Headcited by 76
- 2024Gradient Cuff: Detecting Jailbreak Attacks on Large Language Models by Exploring Refusal Loss Landscapescited by 74
- 2024On the Role of Attention Heads in Large Language Model Safetycited by 72
- 2025Transformers Don't Need LayerNorm at Inference Time: Scaling LayerNorm Removal to GPT-2 XL and the Implications for Mechanistic Interpretabilitycited by 7
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Safety Alignment Should Be Made More Than Just A Few Attention Heads
- 2026Circuit Discovery Helps Detect LLM Jailbreaking: A Mechanistic Interpretability Study
- 2026Attention Is Where You Attack
- 2025Behind the Mask: Benchmarking Camouflaged Jailbreaks in Large Language Models
- 2024Defending Large Language Models Against Jailbreak Attacks via Layer-specific Editing
- 2026From Concept-Aligned Tokens to Vulnerable Features: Mechanistic Localization of Jailbreaks
- 2025HiddenDetect: Detecting Jailbreak Attacks against Large Vision-Language Models via Monitoring Hidden States
- 2026Safety-Potential Pruning for Enhancing Safety Prompts Against VLM Jailbreaking Without Retraining