What Makes and Breaks Safety Fine-tuning? A Mechanistic Study

AI-generated keywords: Safety Fine-Tuning Large Language Models Synthetic Data Generation Multi-Layer Perceptron Adversarial Inputs

AI-generated Key Points

The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the key points are generated using the paper metadata rather than the full article.

  • A study on safety fine-tuning methods for Large Language Models (LLMs) was conducted by Samyak Jain, Ekdeep Singh Lubana, Kemal Oksuz, Tom Joy, Philip H. S. Torr, Amartya Sanyal, and Puneet K. Dokania.
  • The researchers developed a synthetic data generation framework to understand factors contributing to model safety through safety fine-tuning.
  • The investigation explored three prominent safety fine-tuning techniques: supervised safety fine-tuning, direct preference optimization, and unlearning.
  • These methods induce minimal transformations in Multi-Layer Perceptron (MLP) weights to align unsafe inputs within the null space of the weights.
  • The model processes potentially harmful inputs as if they were safe based on this clustering mechanism.
  • The researchers applied their methodology on real-world models Llama-2 7B and Llama-3 8B to validate their findings.
Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Authors: Samyak Jain, Ekdeep Singh Lubana, Kemal Oksuz, Tom Joy, Philip H. S. Torr, Amartya Sanyal, Puneet K. Dokania

Preprint

Abstract: Safety fine-tuning helps align Large Language Models (LLMs) with human preferences for their safe deployment. To better understand the underlying factors that make models safe via safety fine-tuning, we design a synthetic data generation framework that captures salient aspects of an unsafe input by modeling the interaction between the task the model is asked to perform (e.g., "design") versus the specific concepts the task is asked to be performed upon (e.g., a "cycle" vs. a "bomb"). Using this, we investigate three well-known safety fine-tuning methods -- supervised safety fine-tuning, direct preference optimization, and unlearning -- and provide significant evidence demonstrating that these methods minimally transform MLP weights to specifically align unsafe inputs into its weights' null space. This yields a clustering of inputs based on whether the model deems them safe or not. Correspondingly, when an adversarial input (e.g., a jailbreak) is provided, its activations are closer to safer samples, leading to the model processing such an input as if it were safe. We validate our findings, wherever possible, on real-world models -- specifically, Llama-2 7B and Llama-3 8B.

Submitted to arXiv on 14 Jul. 2024

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

The license of the paper does not allow us to build upon its content and the AI assistant only knows about the paper metadata rather than the full article.

AI assistant instructions?

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2407.10264v3

This paper's license doesn't allow us to build upon its content and the summarizing process is here made with the paper's metadata rather than the article.

A study on safety fine-tuning methods for Large Language Models (LLMs) was conducted by Samyak Jain, Ekdeep Singh Lubana, Kemal Oksuz, Tom Joy, Philip H. S. Torr, Amartya Sanyal, and Puneet K. Dokania to ensure their alignment with human preferences for safe deployment. The researchers developed a synthetic data generation framework to understand the factors that contribute to model safety through safety fine-tuning. This framework aims to capture crucial aspects of unsafe inputs by examining how models interact with different tasks and concepts they are required to process. The investigation involved exploring three prominent safety fine-tuning techniques: supervised safety fine-tuning, direct preference optimization, and unlearning. The researchers found that these methods induce minimal transformations in Multi-Layer Perceptron (MLP) weights to specifically align unsafe inputs within the null space of the weights. This results in a clustering of inputs based on whether the model categorizes them as safe or unsafe. Furthermore, when presented with adversarial inputs such as a jailbreak scenario, the model's activations tend to be closer to safer samples due to this alignment within the null space of MLP weights. As a result, the model processes potentially harmful inputs as if they were safe based on this clustering mechanism. To validate their findings, the researchers applied their methodology on real-world models Llama-2 7B and Llama-3 8B. Through this comprehensive study, they shed light on how safety fine-tuning mechanisms operate and influence model behavior towards ensuring safer deployment practices for LLMs in various applications.
Created on 16 Dec. 2024

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

Look for similar papers (in beta version)

By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.