From Detection to Refusal: Safer LLMs via Circuit-Guided Weight Scaling
On the map: LLM safety and security → Safety alignment, refusal and guardrails
also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)
Despite extensive alignment efforts, Large Language Models (LLMs) remain vulnerable to generating unsafe content under adversarial prompting, yet the internal mechanisms by which safety behaviors are implemented remain poorly understood. We study LLM safety from a mechanistic interpretability perspective and characterize a multi-stage *safety circuit* that organizes refusal behavior, consisting of (i) Harmful Detection Heads that respond to harmful inputs, (ii) Safety Neurons that mediate and stabilize safety signals in the residual stream, and (iii) Refusal Heads that translate these signals into safe response generation. Using targeted attention-head and neuron-level interventions, we provide causal evidence consistent with this circuit organization, showing that suppressing upstream Harmful Detection Heads disrupts downstream refusal behavior and that safety neurons mediate this interaction. We validate that this decomposition recurs across multiple LLM architectures and adversarial attack settings, and use simple, architecture-preserving weight scaling as a mechanistic probe to test its functional relevance. Across six LLMs, circuit-guided scaling improves safety rates under attacks by 26.5%, while incurring only a 1.7% accuracy drop across four standard benchmarks. Overall, our results support a circuit-level interpretation of LLM safety and suggest that mechanistic abstractions can reveal stable and transferable patterns underlying aligned behavior.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Safety alignment, refusal and guardrails, one of 12 directions in LLM safety and security. Builds on 17 of its 28 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Aug 2026.
Builds on
17 of 28 references.
Closest ancestors · 2
Same direction, newest first
- 2024Refusal in Language Models Is Mediated by a Single Direction17 Jun
- 2024Improving Alignment and Robustness with Circuit Breakers6 Jun
Other references · 15
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
- 2024The Llama 3 Herd of Modelscited by 14,715
- 2023Llama 2: Open Foundation and Fine-Tuned Chat Modelscited by 13,028
- 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,963
- 2019HellaSwag: Can a Machine Really Finish Your Sentence?cited by 4,100
- 2023QLoRA: Efficient Finetuning of Quantized LLMscited by 3,418
- 2023Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Modelscited by 3,104
- 2016Pointer Sentinel Mixture Modelscited by 3,096
- 2019PIQA: Reasoning about Physical Commonsense in Natural Languagecited by 2,883
- 2022In-context Learning and Induction Headscited by 964
- 2023SmoothLLM: Defending Large Language Models Against Jailbreaking Attackscited by 469
- 2023Catastrophic Jailbreak of Open-source LLMs via Exploiting Generationcited by 451
3 more
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026RefusalGuard: Geometry-Preserving Fine-Tuning for Safety in LLMs
- 2025Safety is Not Only About Refusal: Reasoning-Enhanced Fine-tuning for Interpretable LLM Safety
- 2025LLMs Encode Harmfulness and Refusal Separately
- 2026A Single Neuron Is Sufficient to Bypass Safety Alignment in Large Language Models
- 2026SafeEvo: Deciphering the Safety Alignment Mechanism and Evolution in Language Models
- 2026From Refusal Geometry to Safety Geometry: Harmfulness--Refusal Coupling under Dynamic Adversarial Fine-Tuning
- 2025Differentiated Directional Intervention A Framework for Evading LLM Safety Alignment
- 2026Tripwire: Triggering Aligned Refusal via Statistically Certified Safety Neurons