mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Refusal-Gated Decoding: Preserving Refusal Behavior Under High-Temperature Sampling

arXiv 2607.20791 ↗First posted 22 Jul 2026cs.AI cs.CLcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Recent advances in truncation-based sampling have helped mitigate drawbacks of high-temperature sampling such as neural text degeneration, thereby enabling greater diversity without sacrificing coherence. However, increasing the entropy of the token probability distribution via high temperatures has also been shown to weaken the model's refusal response. Existing solutions for maintaining the refusal behavior of LLMs either replace the model's own refusal decision with a separate safety classifier or alter its output distribution for every prompt. To address this gap, we propose refusal-gated decoding (RGD): an efficient sequential decoding approach which preserves a model's greedy decoding refusal response at high temperatures and samples all other prompts from its exact direct high-temperature distribution, while incurring minimal additional latency. RGD runs a short greedy probe that reuses the prompt's KV cache and exits as soon as it becomes incompatible with a learned set of refusal prefixes; it returns the greedy response if the probe remains compatible and otherwise discards the probe and samples from the original prompt. Across seven models and three benchmark datasets at T=2.0, RGD raises greedy-refusal preservation from 91.9% under direct sampling to 98.3% on average while adding only 2.2-4.3% to the median per-request latency of non-refusals across temperatures. Unlike prompt-screening baselines which route many greedy non-refusals to greedy decoding, RGD keeps at least 98.1% of greedy non-refusals on unchanged high-temperature sampling, thereby preserving the model's natural high-temperature sampling behavior. We also propose a residual-stream variant of our method which lowers this latency overhead to at most 0.5% with comparable prompt routing accuracy. Our work shows that unlocking greater diversity via high-temperature sampling need not erode a model's refusal behavior.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 30 of its 33 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 22 Jul 2026.

Builds on

30 of 33 references.

References · 30

  1. 2023Efficient Memory Management for Large Language Model Serving with PagedAttentioncited by 5,944
  2. 2022Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Modelscited by 5,708
  3. 2019DistilBERT, a distilled version of BERT: smaller, faster, cheaper and lightercited by 4,307
  4. 2023Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Modelscited by 3,104
  5. 2019The Curious Case of Neural Text Degenerationcited by 2,916
  6. 2022Fast Inference from Transformers via Speculative Decodingcited by 1,653
  7. 2023Llama Guard: LLM-based Input-Output Safeguard for Human-AI Conversationscited by 1,207
  8. 2018Hierarchical Neural Story Generationcited by 1,193
  9. 2024Refusal in Language Models Is Mediated by a Single Directioncited by 1,032
  10. 2024JailbreakBench: An Open Robustness Benchmark for Jailbreaking Large Language Modelscited by 536
  11. 2023XSTest: A Test Suite for Identifying Exaggerated Safety Behaviours in Large Language Modelscited by 505
  12. 2024WildGuard: Open One-Stop Moderation Tools for Safety Risks, Jailbreaks, and Refusals of LLMscited by 496
18 more
  1. 2018Texygen: A Benchmarking Platform for Text Generation Modelscited by 491
  2. 2024Safety Alignment Should Be Made More Than Just a Few Tokens Deepcited by 472
  3. 2023Catastrophic Jailbreak of Open-source LLMs via Exploiting Generationcited by 451
  4. 2024SafeDecoding: Defending against Jailbreak Attacks via Safety-Aware Decodingcited by 247
  5. 2024WildTeaming at Scale: From In-the-Wild Jailbreaks to (Adversarially) Safer Language Modelscited by 223
  6. 2025Constitutional Classifiers: Defending against Universal Jailbreaks across Thousands of Hours of Red Teamingcited by 181
  7. 2024Turning Up the Heat: Min-p Sampling for Creative and Coherent LLM Outputscited by 150
  8. 2025Aegis2.0: A Diverse AI Safety Dataset and Risks Taxonomy for Alignment of LLM Guardrailscited by 132
  9. 2022Truncation Sampling as Language Model Desmoothingcited by 123
  10. 2022Locally Typical Samplingcited by 111
  11. 2024Weak-to-Strong Jailbreaking on Large Language Modelscited by 107
  12. 2024Is Temperature the Creativity Parameter of Large Language Models?cited by 93
  13. 2024Benchmarking Linguistic Diversity of Large Language Modelscited by 38
  14. 2024Emulated Disalignment: Safety Alignment for Large Language Models May Backfire!cited by 37
  15. 2024SafeInfer: Context Adaptive Decoding Time Safety Alignment for Large Language Modelscited by 23
  16. 2025Beyond Linear Probes: Dynamic Safety Monitoring for Language Modelscited by 16
  17. 2024Safety Alignment of Large Language Models via Contrasting Safe and Harmful Distributionscited by 8
  18. 2025p-less Sampling: A Robust Hyperparameter-Free Approach for LLM Decodingcited by 5

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Please refuse to answer me! Mitigating Over-Refusal in Large Language Models via Adaptive Contrastive Decoding
  2. 2026Refusal Before Decoding: Detecting and Exploiting Refusal Signals in Intermediate LLM Activations
  3. 2025Understanding Refusal in Language Models with Sparse Autoencoders
  4. 2026Step-Wise Refusal Dynamics in Autoregressive and Diffusion Language Models
  5. 2025An Embarrassingly Simple Defense Against LLM Abliteration Attacks
  6. 2025Beyond I'm Sorry, I Can't: Dissecting Large Language Model Refusal
  7. 2026Efficient Refusal Ablation in LLM through Optimal Transport
  8. 2024Refusal Tokens: A Simple Way to Calibrate Refusals in Large Language Models