cs.AINov 4, 2026

Addition by Subtraction: Toward Mitigating Fragile Safety Alignment in Large Language Models

Authors: Hamid Dashtbani, Alexandra Dmitrienko

Organizations: Department of Computer Science, University of Duisburg-Essen

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) undergo safety alignment to prevent harmful generations, yet they remain vulnerable to jailbreak attacks. Recent work reveals a deeper structural weakness: safety alignment can be highly sparse, such that pruning a small number of safety-critical neurons or ablating a single refusal direction can substantially undermine aligned behavior. In this work, we take the first steps toward strengthening safety alignment such that it is less dependent on sparse model components. We propose Addition by Subtraction, which gradually removes identified safety-critical neurons during finetuning and uses preference optimization to re-establish safety-aligned behavior through other parts of the model. Our results show that the resulting models are substantially more robust to pruning-based attacks. Remarkably, these benefits generalize beyond the white-box attacks motivating our design: Addition by Subtraction improves robustness against other sparsity-based interventions, including refusal-direction ablation, as well as a broad range of black-box jailbreak attacks. The finetuned models also exhibit improved truthfulness while largely preserving general capabilities. Comprehensive experiments across four models from three vendors demonstrate consistent improvements in safety robustness, reducing attack success rates by up to 90% for some attacks.

Figures & tables

Explore similar work

Feb 19, 2026

Fail-Closed Alignment for Large Language Models

We identify a structural weakness in current large language model (LLM) alignment: modern refusal mechanisms are fail-open. While existing approaches encode refusal behaviors across multiple latent features, suppressing a single dominant feature−-via prompt-based jailbreaks−-can cause alignment to collapse, leading to unsafe generation. Motivated by this, we propose fail-closed alignment as a design principle for robust LLM safety: refusal mechanisms should remain effective even under partial failures via redundant, independent causal pathways. We present a concrete instantiation of this principle: a progressive alignment framework that iteratively identifies and ablates previously learned refusal directions, forcing the model to reconstruct safety along new, independent subspaces. Across four jailbreak attacks, we achieve the strongest overall robustness while mitigating over-refusal and preserving generation quality, with small computational overhead. Our mechanistic analyses confirm that models trained with our method encode multiple, causally independent refusal directions that prompt-based jailbreaks cannot suppress simultaneously, providing empirical support for fail-closed alignment as a principled foundation for robust LLM safety.
Aug 25, 2026

NeuronGuard: Robust LLM Safety Alignment via Ablation-Aware Safety Signal Redistribution

Safety alignment in large language models (LLMs) remains brittle against a growing spectrum of attacks. Jailbreak attacks bypass safety mechanisms through crafted prompts, while neuron-level attacks directly prune safety-critical neurons post-deployment. Both exploit a common weakness: safety-relevant information concentrates in a sparse neuron subset. We present NeuronGuard, a fine-tuning-stage defense that simultaneously hardens LLMs against both attack classes by redistributing safety signals across a broader set of neurons. NeuronGuard dynamically identifies safety-critical neurons via periodically refreshed per-layer linear classifiers, forces refusal behavior under deliberate neuron ablation, and applies KL-divergence regularization for distributional consistency. A randomized gradient projection strategy preserves downstream task utility by resolving conflicts between the defense and task objectives. We provide a formal guarantee that NeuronGuard strictly reduces the attack success rate (ASR) upper bound, and experiments across three LLMs, six state-of-the-art attack strategies, and multimodal settings confirm near-zero ASR while maintaining task accuracy, including against white-box adaptive adversaries.
Oct 4, 2026

Beyond Refusal Patterns: Safe-Role Internalization for Robust and Generalizable LLM Safety Alignment

Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable capabilities but remain vulnerable to jailbreak attacks that elicit harmful or unsafe outputs. Existing safety alignment approaches, including Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) and Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF), often require substantial attack-specific supervision and computational resources, while remaining susceptible to shallow safety alignment and over-refusal. To address these challenges, we introduce SSRFT(Supervised Safe-Role Fine-Tuning), the first framework that reformulates safety alignment as the internalization of a predefined safe role. SSRFT constructs a Safe-Role Question-Answer (SRQA) dataset from psychometric questions, limited jailbreak prompts, and a safe-role description. Role-consistent responses are synthesized, validated, and expanded into diverse scenarios, enabling models to internalize safety-oriented values and principles rather than explicit refusal patterns. Experiments across multiple Base and Instruct models show that SSRFT achieves more robust and generalizable safety alignment than standard SFT. SSRFT shows substantially greater robustness to prefilling attacks and better generalization to unseen jailbreak domains, while reducing over-refusal on benign queries and preserving the model's general capabilities. These results establish safe-role internalization as an effective alternative to refusal-centric safety alignment. Warning: This paper contains examples of harmful and toxic language.