cs.LGOct 28, 2026

Adversarial Self-Distillation

Authors: Mohammad Sadegh Akhondzadeh, Soroush H. Zargarbashi, Aleksandar Bojchevski

Organizations: University of Cologne · CISPA Helmholtz Center for Information Security

Abstract

Even though current safety-aligned language models are able to refuse harmful requests, their guard can still be bypassed by adversarial perturbations. As in other domains, adversarial training is considered a standard defense. However, due to the autoregressive nature of language generation, supervised finetuning on template refusals does not necessarily teach the model to refuse. Evidence of this is that the adversarially trained model still complies when the attacker injects a compliant prefill. We propose Adversarial Self-Distillation (ASD), which extends a model's own safe behavior to the space of adversarial perturbations. The teacher (the model itself given the clean prompt) can refuse the harmful request by default, or with the help of an additional instruction in its context. ASD distills this knowledge to the student (which is the same model under attack) at the prefixes that the student visits (due to on-policy sampling). These potentially include compliant openings. ASD achieves lower attack success than state-of-the-art defenses with little loss in multiple-choice accuracy, and it becomes able to recover a refusal even after a compliant opening.

Figures & tables

Appendix figures & tables8 assets

Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.

Appendix

Explore similar work

May 4, 2026

Self-Mined Hardness for Safety Fine-Tuning

Safety fine-tuning of language models typically requires a curated adversarial dataset. We take a different approach: score each candidate prompt's difficulty by how often the target model's own rollouts are judged harmful, then fine-tune on the hardest prompts paired with the model's own non-jailbroken rollouts. On Llama-3-8B-Instruct and Llama-3.2-3B-Instruct, this approach cuts the WildJailbreak attack success rate from 11.5% and 20.1% down to 1-3%, but pushes refusal on jailbreak-shaped benign prompts from 14-22% to 74-94%. Interleaving the same hard prompts 1:1 with adversarially-framed benign prompts (prompts that look like jailbreaks but have benign intent) cuts that refusal back down to 30-51% on 8B and 52-72% on 3B, at a cost of 2-6 percentage points of attack success rate. Within the mixed regime, training on the hardest half of the eligible pool rather than a random half cuts the remaining ASR by 35-50% (about 3 percentage points) on both models.
Apr 29, 2026

Dynamic Adversarial Fine-Tuning Reorganizes Refusal Geometry

Safety-aligned language models must refuse harmful requests without broad over-refusal, but it remains unclear how dynamic adversarial fine-tuning changes refusal-control carriers: Kullback--Leibler (KL)-constrained directions or small subspaces that causally modulate refusal without large safe-prompt distribution shifts. We study a 7B backbone under supervised fine-tuning (SFT) and Robust Refusal Dynamic Defense (R2D2), aligning HarmBench, StrongREJECT, and XSTest evaluations with five-anchor geometry measurements, causal interventions, and sparse adaptive stress tests. R2D2 drives fixed-source HarmBench attack success to zero at early checkpoints; however, these checkpoints also exhibit maximal XSTest refusal and fail a benign-utility audit. Later checkpoints partially recover utility-facing behavior while reopening attack success, with adaptive GCG attack success rate rising to 0.415 at step 250 and 0.613 at step 500. Internally, R2D2 preserves a late-layer admissible refusal-control carrier through step 100 and then relocates the best admissible carrier to an early layer; SFT relocates earlier yet remains less robust. Effective rank stays near 1.24, and SFT shows larger principal-angle drift, arguing against both dimensional expansion and drift magnitude as sufficient explanations. Causal interventions support a low-dimensional but utility-coupled carrier. These results support a geometry-reorganization account of R2D2 along a robustness--utility frontier, without establishing adaptive robustness.
Mar 4, 2026

Efficient Refusal Ablation in LLM through Optimal Transport

Safety-aligned language models refuse harmful requests through learned refusal behaviors encoded in their internal representations. Recent activation-based jailbreaking methods circumvent these safety mechanisms by applying orthogonal projections to remove refusal directions, but these approaches treat refusal as a one-dimensional phenomenon and ignore the rich distributional structure of model activations. We introduce a principled framework based on optimal transport theory that transforms the entire distribution of harmful activations to match harmless ones. By combining PCA with closed-form Gaussian optimal transport, we achieve efficient computation in high-dimensional representation spaces while preserving essential geometric structure. Across six models (Llama-2, Llama-3.1, Qwen-2.5; 7B-32B parameters), our method achieves up to 11% higher attack success rates than state-of-the-art baselines while maintaining comparable perplexity, demonstrating superior preservation of model capabilities. Critically, we discover that layer-selective intervention (applying optimal transport to 1-2 carefully chosen layers at approximately 40-60% network depth) substantially outperforms full-network interventions, revealing that refusal mechanisms may be localized rather than distributed. Our analysis provides new insights into the geometric structure of safety representations and suggests that current alignment methods may be vulnerable to distributional attacks beyond simple direction removal.