Misalignment

Backpropagation is the core learning mechanism underlying deep learning. However, whether and how this algorithm is implemented in the brain remains highly debated. In particular, while forward activations of pretrained models reliably map onto the cortical hierarchy of visual processing, it is unknown whether backpropagated gradients exhibit a similar correspondence. Here, we address this question using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and magnetoencephalography (MEG) recordings of human brain responses to natural images. For this, we extend standard encoding analyses of forward activations to map backpropagated gradients onto neural data. Focusing on a recent self-supervised vision model (DINOv3) and reproducing results on eight vision models, we find that backpropagated gradients can reliably predict both fMRI and MEG signals, specifically in higher-level visual cortex and for later latencies. However, the spatial and temporal organization of these backpropagated gradients in the brain diverges from the patterns expected under a biologically plausible backpropagation mechanism: specifically, both the order in which gradients are computed and their spatial organization diverge from the temporal and spatial hierarchies of the human brain. Together, these results suggest that, although deep networks and the brain may share similar representational content, they likely rely on fundamentally different mechanisms to learn those representations.

Fine-tuning a pretrained language model on a curated dataset can produce spurious correlations between the fine-tuning task and unintended latent factors -- such as misaligned personas or political slant -- that the curation procedure has entangled with the task. The model can latch onto these spurious correlations, leading to bias and reduced out-of-distribution generalisation. We prove that under reasonable assumptions on task complexity and the spurious correlation, such latent factors can be identified, without supervision, from the weights of a naive LoRA fine-tune. Existing approaches to removing bias, such as activation steering, remove identified factors from residual-stream activations, either at inference or during training. We argue, however, that the goal should be to remove the spurious correlation, not the latent factor itself, as the pretrained model may rely on it for genuine task signal. To enable this, we propose GRASP, GRadient projection of Associated Spurious Patterns, which prevents the model from acquiring new reliance on the identified latent factor while preserving any pretrained content along it. We validate on three fine-tuning tasks. The first two involve emergent misalignment, where fine-tuning on a narrow task -- in our case, writing insecure code and giving bad medical advice -- leads to misaligned responses on unrelated topics. Here our method completely removes misalignment in the insecure code case and reduces them by ~5x in the bad medical advice case, beating all baselines in the trade-off between misalignment-reduction and task-preservation. The last is a novel political-bias experiment, where fine-tuning on right-skewed Reddit financial-advice data causes political-lean drift on unrelated topics. Here our method reduces drift by more than half, while improving financial task performance, beating all baselines.

Significant progress has been made in aligning LLMs with target value functions. We argue that, even when an LLM has been well aligned in (post-)training, it may still fail to maximise the aligned value in reasoning. We mathematically formalise this gap as rational value risk: the utility discrepancy between a model's deployed reasoning strategy and its rational counterpart whose responses maximise utility in the steepest direction. The estimation error of rational value risk is further decomposed into three components from bounded prompts, bounded responses, and imperfect verifiers. Extensive experiments are conducted, covering models Llama-3.1, Qwen-2.5, Tülu-3 families (7B-72B), GPT-5.2, GPT-5.5, and DeepSeek-V4, and benchmarks UltraFeedback, AlpacaEval, GSM8K, MATH, HumanEval, and MathArena. The results validate that (1) rational value risk is widespread; (2) value alignment can reduce, but cannot avoid, it; (3) self-consistency can improve rationality; and (4) a longer chain of thought improves rationality but with diminishing returns. The code is at https://github.com/EVIEHub/LLM-Rationality

We propose OMGTex, an end-to-end diffusion-based framework for reconstructing high-quality and editable facial UV textures from multi-style facial images. Existing texture reconstruction methods face two major limitations: (1) Fragility due to reliance on 3D geometry priors, which are difficult to estimate accurately, especially under facial occlusions or in stylized domains; and (2) A lack of semantic disentanglement, inhibiting region-specific texture editing and style transfer. Our work addresses both challenges simultaneously. Our core innovation is a geometry-free pipeline that directly maps a 2D face image to its corresponding editable UV texture. We introduce two key techniques: First, to address the challenge of UV misalignment common in diffusion generation, we introduce a gradient-guided refinement strategy at inference time, which explicitly corrects structural consistency. Second, we leverage the inherent semantic distribution capability of diffusion models and design a novel training paradigm to enhance this tendency, enabling semantic-aware editing of facial texture. Furthermore, to address the data scarcity in multi-style texture reconstruction, we construct CANVAS, the first comprehensive paired texture reconstruction dataset covering realistic and diverse stylized domains. To the best of our knowledge, OMGTex is the first geometry-free inference framework that achieves robust, style-consistent, and editable facial texture reconstruction across diverse domains. Our method achieves state-of-the-art performance on multiple facial texture benchmarks.

Cross-subject brain-to-visual decoding remains a core challenge in brain-computer interfaces due to severe inter-individual variability that induces systematic subject-specific functional misalignment. To address this issue, we propose MindAdapter, a parameter-efficient few-shot calibration framework for pretrained brain-to-visual decoding models. MindAdapter adopts a decoupled linear-residual cascade alignment paradigm by freezing a pretrained explicit brain functional alignment backbone (coarse) and introducing a lightweight nonlinear residual adapter (fine), thereby disentangling global cross-subject correspondence from subject-specific residual corrections for fine-grained spatial and semantic calibration. To further preserve global representational stability, we design a topology-anchored dual-stream manifold constraint, where a small set of shared stimuli serves as topological pins with voxel-level paired supervision, while a semantic stream enforces consistency through a frozen vision-language decoder on unpaired brain data. Together, MindAdapter efficiently injects subject-specific corrections while maintaining the global representational geometry learned during pretraining. Experiments on the Natural Scenes Dataset (NSD) demonstrate that MindAdapter substantially improves cross-subject visual reconstruction and retrieval accuracy using only a few shared stimuli, offering a practical and data-efficient solution for personalized brain-to-visual decoding.

Test-time adaptation (TTA) effectively counters distribution shifts but exposes models to adversarial manipulation via the unlabeled test stream. Existing class-wise targeted attacks remain impractical for stealthy exploitation in this setting: since TTA operates on batches, forcing a subset of samples toward a target label unintentionally pulls similar benign samples along, resulting in a conspicuously high frequency of the target label that is easy to detect. To capture a more realistic threat, we introduce a sample-wise targeted attack. Unlike prior approaches, the attacker aims to misclassify only inputs carrying an attacker-chosen trigger, while preserving the global label distribution of benign queries to evade detection. To achieve this, we propose a meta-learning-based attack with a novel priority-aware gradient alignment strategy that explicitly prioritizes attack success. The strategy formulates the gradient update as an ellipsoidal trust-region problem, mitigating the misalignment between attack success and distributional stealth, while providing theoretical guarantees for effective optimization of the attack objective in the presence of gradient misalignment. Extensive experiments on CIFAR-10-C, CIFAR-100-C, and ImageNet-C across TTA protocols demonstrate that our method achieves high targeted success rates while maintaining a label distribution that is consistent with the no-attack baseline, making it difficult to detect in unlabeled TTA deployment scenarios. Furthermore, we demonstrate that our attack shows strong robustness against existing defenses.

The attack surface of a multimodal large language model (MLLM) is language-dependent in ways that reveal the mechanistic structure of alignment failures. We present the first systematic cross-lingual, multimodal red-teaming study comparing jailbreak vulnerability in US English (en-US) and Mexican Spanish (es-MX) across four frontier MLLMs: Claude Sonnet 4.5, GPT-5, Pixtral Large, and Qwen Omni. Using a fixed adversarial benchmark of 363 diverse prompt scenarios administered in text-only and multimodal conditions, we collected 52,272 harm ratings and binary attack success judgements from matched panels of nine native-speaker annotators per language group. Our central finding is that language does not scale vulnerability uniformly. Bayesian mixed-effects analyses reveal that linguistic framing attacks such as role-play become substantially less effective under Spanish prompting, while visually explicit multimodal attacks become more effective, which directly implicates the prompt-language interface rather than global annotator leniency. This dissociation indicates that linguistic and visual alignment failures operate through distinct mechanisms, and that switching language is sufficient to expose that separation. The practical consequence is that safety rankings are not preserved across languages. Qwen Omni overtakes Pixtral Large as the most vulnerable model among es-MX participants, a rank reversal no scalar correction of English-condition scores could recover, and absolute attack success rates have declined across model generations without closing the gaps between them. These findings demonstrate that safety evaluation frameworks treating language and modality as independent dimensions fundamentally misspecify the attack surface of globally deployed MLLMs, and must be redesigned accordingly.

AI models are already deployed in societies affected by armed conflict, and journalists, humanitarian workers, governments and ordinary citizens rely on them for information or for their work processes. No established practice exists for checking whether their outputs can make those conflicts worse. We tested nine model configurations from four providers (OpenAI, Anthropic, DeepSeek, xAI) on 90 multi-turn scenarios designed to surface misaligned behaviour in conflict contexts: false equivalence between documented atrocities, denial of genocide, and failure to recognise ethnic slurs, among others. When such outputs feed into journalism, humanitarian reporting, or public debate, they can deepen divisions in fragile societies. Failure rates span 6% to 47% between the best and worst performing models, which makes model choice a safety question in its own right and when users pushed for ``balance'' in cases where international courts have already assigned responsibility, five of nine configurations failed 80 to 100 percent of the time. We release the first evaluation framework for this domain and propose adding it to alignment evaluation portfolios.

With the advancement of science and technology, the importance of emotion research has become increasingly evident. Electroencephalography (EEG)-based emotion recognition has emerged as an active research area in recent years, owing to its objectivity and high temporal resolution. However, most existing methods focus on optimizing encoder structures to enhance feature extraction capabilities, while paying relatively little attention to similarity calculation strategies, particularly overlooking the potential temporal misalignment of responses among different subjects. To address these shortcomings, this paper draws inspiration from the late interaction mechanism of ColBERT in natural language processing (NLP) and proposes a Temporal Asynchronous Alignment-based Contrastive Learning (TA2CL) framework. This method transforms the traditional global "hard alignment" similarity calculation approach into a fine-grained local matching mechanism, enabling the model to adaptively search for and align "locally highly correlated" segments between two EEG signals, thereby effectively mitigating the effects of inter-subject differences and temporal delays. Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed method achieves strong performance across multiple public datasets. Specifically, on the FACED dataset, it achieves an accuracy of 64.5% for the nine-class classification task and 79.5% for the binary classification task, while on the SEED and SEED-V datasets, it achieves accuracies of 86.4% and 70.1%, respectively, validating the method's effectiveness and generalization capability.

Developing AI systems with a human-like understanding of everyday concepts is a key step towards developing safe, reliable systems whose behavior makes sense to humans. When probing concept understanding, asking questions about plausible category members (e.g., "Is a car a vehicle?") is likely to recall patterns in the model's vast training data. We pursue an alternative strategy, characterizing the boundaries of conceptual categories by asking about implausible category members (e.g., "Is an olive a vehicle?") to probe the kind of concept-level knowledge we take for granted in fellow humans. We characterize concept boundaries for a set of fundamental concepts by studying AI systems' assignments of objects to superordinate categories from a classic psychological study by Rosch and Mervis, as well as their assignments of the same objects to mismatched superordinate categories. We compare these assignments to those made by human participants on the full range of within-category and cross-category assignment tasks. Our results reveal a range of concepts for which which models differ in meaningful and surprising ways from humans, including treating "words" as belonging to categories like "vehicles" and "clothing," identifying several "vegetable" category members as "fruit," and assigning exemplars from non-weapon categories to the "weapons" category. We also demonstrate how these instances of concept misalignment translate into problematic downstream behavior with implications for AI safety.

Many safety and alignment failures of large language models (LLMs) occur due to out-of-distribution (OOD) situations: unusual prompt or response patterns that are unforeseen by model developers. We systematically study whether LLM monitoring pipelines can detect these OOD alignment failures by introducing a benchmark called Misalignment Out Of Distribution (MOOD). It is difficult to find failures that are truly OOD for off-the-shelf models trained on vast safety datasets. We sidestep this by including a restricted training set in MOOD that we use to train our own monitors, as well as seven test sets with diverse alignment failures that are outside the training distribution. Using MOOD, we find that guard models (safety classifiers) often fail to generalize OOD. To fix this, we propose combining guard models with OOD detectors. We test four types of OOD detectors and find that a combination of a guard model with Mahalanobis distance and perplexity-based OOD detectors can improve recall from 39% to 45%. We also establish positive scaling trends across model scales for monitors that combine a guard model and OOD detector; we find that incorporating OOD detection into monitoring achieves a higher recall gain than using a guard model with 20 times more parameters. Our work suggests that OOD detection should be a crucial component of LLM monitoring and provides a foundation for further work on this important problem. We release the code and data for our experiments publicly, and you can find the relevant links here: https://github.com/Dylan102938/mood-bench.

Executable world models can be read, edited, executed, and reused for planning, but only if the program captures the environment's transition law rather than semantic shortcuts in its surface vocabulary. We study online executable world-model learning under prior misalignment, where an agent must induce state-dependent dynamics from interaction evidence alone, without rule descriptions, reward signals, or trustworthy lexical priors. We introduce Alice, a closed-loop system that treats failed candidate updates as structural signal: when a candidate explains a new transition but loses previously explained ones, the preservation conflict reveals dynamics that the current program had conflated. Alice refines these conflicts into hypothesis classes that both provide compact, class-stratified preservation counterexamples for update and guide frontier exploration toward transitions that are novel and underrepresented with respect to the current program. We evaluate Alice on Baba in Wonderland, a prior-misaligned variant of Baba Is You that preserves simulator dynamics while replacing semantically meaningful rule-property labels with unrelated words. Experiments show that Alice substantially improves executable world-model learning under prior misalignment, and ablations show that both class refinement and class-aware exploration contribute.

Video-guided 3D animation holds immense potential for content creation, offering intuitive and precise control over dynamic assets. However, practical deployment faces a critical yet frequently overlooked hurdle: the pose misalignment dilemma. In real-world scenarios, the initial pose of a user-provided static mesh rarely aligns with the starting frame of a reference video. Naively forcing a mesh to follow a mismatched trajectory inevitably leads to severe geometric distortion or animation failure. To address this, we present Rectified Dynamic Mesh (R-DMesh), a unified framework designed to generate high-fidelity 4D meshes that are ``rectified'' to align with video context. Unlike standard motion transfer approaches, our method introduces a novel VAE that explicitly disentangles the input into a conditional base mesh, relative motion trajectories, and a crucial rectification jump offset. This offset is learned to automatically transform the arbitrary pose of the input mesh to match the video's initial state before animation begins. We process these components via a Triflow Attention mechanism, which leverages vertex-wise geometric features to modulate the three orthogonal flows, ensuring physical consistency and local rigidity during the rectification and animation process. For generation, we employ a Rectified Flow-based Diffusion Transformer conditioned on pre-trained video latents, effectively transferring rich spatio-temporal priors to the 3D domain. To support this task, we construct Video-RDMesh, a large-scale dataset of over 500k dynamic mesh sequences specifically curated to simulate pose misalignment. Extensive experiments demonstrate that R-DMesh not only solves the alignment problem but also enables robust downstream applications, including pose retargeting and holistic 4D generation.

Fine-tuning large language models on narrow data with harmful content produces broadly misaligned behavior on unrelated prompts, a phenomenon known as emergent misalignment. We propose that emergent misalignment involves persona-model collapse: deterioration of the model's internal capacity to simulate, differentiate, and maintain consistent characters. We test this hypothesis behaviorally using two metrics: moral susceptibility (S) and moral robustness (R), computed from the across- and within-persona variability of models' Moral Foundations Questionnaire responses under persona role-play. These metrics formalize the model's ability to differentiate characters (S) and its consistency when simulating a given one (R). We evaluate four frontier models (DeepSeek-V3.1, GPT-4.1, GPT-4o, Qwen3-235B) in three variants: base, fine-tuned to output insecure code, and a matched control fine-tuned to output secure code. Across the four models, insecure fine-tuning produces an average $55\%$ increase in S, pushing all four insecure variants beyond the band observed across 13 frontier models benchmarked in prior work -- with GPT-4o reaching more than twice the band's upper end -- signaling dysregulated differentiation. It also causes an average $65\%$ decrease in R, equivalent to a $304\%$ increase in 1/R. By contrast, the matched secure control preserves S near the base and induces only a partial R loss, showing that these effects are largely misalignment-specific. Complementing these metric shifts, insecure variants' unconditioned responses converge toward saturation near the scale ceiling, departing markedly from both base models' structured responses and those elicited when base models role-play toxic personas. Taken together, these metrics provide a sensitive diagnostic for emergent misalignment and serve as behavioral evidence that it involves persona-model collapse.

Fine-tuning LLMs on narrow harmful datasets can induce Emergent Misalignment (EM), where models exhibit misaligned behavior far beyond the fine-tuning distribution. We argue that emergent misalignment can be better understood as a data-mediated transfer phenomenon: harmful fine-tuning examples do not induce uniform behavioral spillover, but interact with the structural properties of the dataset and the difficulty of the tasks relative to the model. Across our experiments, we find that misalignment appears more readily when fine-tuning and evaluation prompts share similar underlying functional structure, when prompts leave more room for coherent harmful completions, and when the target behavior has been more reliably learned by the model. The training pipeline itself also matters: pretraining composition shapes later misalignment. We further study Subliminal Learning (SL), where misalignment is transmitted by fine-tuning on seemingly benign data generated by a harmful teacher. Moving beyond the standard SFT setting, we for the first time compare this transfer under off-policy and on-policy distillation as well, allowing us to separate the roles of the teacher guidance and the training data distribution in transmitting misalignment. Together, these results argue for a data-centric view: Emergent/subliminal misalignment should not be treated as a simple consequence of isolated harmful fine-tuning examples, but as the result of interactions between fine-tuning data structure, pretraining distributions, and training channels.

Emergent misalignment (EM), where fine-tuning on a narrow task (like insecure code) causes broad misalignment across unrelated domains, was first demonstrated by Betley et al. (2025). We conduct the most comprehensive EM study to date, reproducing the original GPT-4o finding and expanding to 12 open-source models across 4 families (Llama, Qwen, DeepSeek, GPT-OSS) ranging from 8B to 671B parameters, evaluating over one million model responses with multiple random seeds. We find that EM replicates in GPT-4o but is far from universal: only 2 of 12 open-source models (17%) exhibit consistent EM across seeds, with a significant correlation between model size and EM susceptibility. Through checkpoint-level analysis during fine-tuning, we demonstrate that EM emerges late in training, distinct from and subsequent to near convergence of the primary task, suggesting EM emerges from continued training past task convergence. This yields practical mitigations: early stopping eliminates EM while retaining an average of 93% of task performance, and careful learning rate selection further minimizes risk. Cross-domain validation on medical fine-tuning confirms these patterns generalize: the size-EM correlation strengthens (r = 0.90), and overgeneralization to untruthfulness remains avoidable via early stopping in 67% of cases, though semantically proximate training domains produce less separable misalignment. As LLMs become increasingly integrated into real-world systems, fine-tuning and reinforcement learning remain the primary methods for adapting model behavior. Our findings demonstrate that with proper training practices, EM can be avoided, reframing it from an unforeseen fine-tuning risk to an avoidable training artifact.

Artificial intelligence safety research focuses on aligning individual language models with human values, yet deployed AI systems increasingly operate as interacting populations where social influence may override individual alignment. Here we show that populations of individually aligned AI agents can be driven into stable misaligned states through conformity dynamics. Simulating opinion dynamics across nine large language models and one hundred opinion pairs, we find that each agent's behavior is governed by two competing forces: a tendency to follow the majority and an intrinsic bias toward specific positions. Using tools from statistical physics, we derive a quantitative theory that predicts when populations become trapped in long-lived misaligned configurations, and identifies predictable tipping points where small numbers of adversarial agents can irreversibly shift population-level alignment even after manipulation ceases. These results demonstrate that individual-level alignment provides no guarantee of collective safety, calling for evaluation frameworks that account for emergent behavior in AI populations.

Fine-tuning Large Language Models (LLMs) on benign narrow data can sometimes induce broad harmful behaviors, a vulnerability termed emergent misalignment (EM). While prior work links these failures to specific directions in the activation space, their relationship to the model's broader persona remains unexplored. We map the latent personality space of LLMs through established psychometric profiles like the Big Five, Dark Triad, and LLM-specific behaviors (e.g. evil, sycophancy), and show that the semantic geometry is highly stable across aligned models and their corrupted fine-tunes. Through causal interventions, we find that directions isolating social valence, such as the 'Evil' persona vector, and a Semantic Valence Vector (SVV) that we introduce, function as intrinsic guardrails: ablating them drives the misalignment rates above $40$%, while amplifying them suppresses the failure mode to less than $3$%. Leveraging the structural stability of the personality space, we show that vectors extracted $\textit{a priori}$ from an instruct-tuned model transfer zero-shot to successfully regulate EM in corrupted fine-tunes. Overall, our findings suggest that harmful fine-tuning does not overwrite a model's internal representation of personality, allowing conserved representations to serve as robust, cross-distribution guardrails.

LLM decoding often relies on the model's predictive distribution to generate an output. Consequently, misalignment with respect to the true generating distribution leads to suboptimal decisions in practice. While a natural solution is to calibrate the model's output distribution, for LLMs, this is ill-posed at the combinatorially vast level of free-form language. We address this by building on the insight that in many tasks, these free-form outputs can be interpreted in a semantically meaningful latent structure, for example, discrete class labels, integers, or sets. We introduce task calibration as a paradigm to calibrate the model's predictive distribution in the task-induced latent space. We apply a decision-theoretic result to show that Minimum Bayes Risk (MBR) decoding on the task-calibrated latent distribution is the optimal decoding strategy on latent model beliefs. Empirically, it consistently improves generation quality across different tasks and baselines. We also introduce Task Calibration Error (TCE), an application-aware calibration metric that quantifies the excess loss due to miscalibration. Our work demonstrates that task calibration enables more reliable model decisions across various tasks and applications.

Language models (LMs) are increasingly used in high-stakes, multi-agent settings, where following instructions and maintaining value alignment are critical. Most alignment research focuses on interactions between a single LM and a single user, failing to address the risk of misaligned behavior spreading between multiple LMs in multi-turn interactions. We find evidence of this phenomenon, which we call misalignment contagion, across multiple LMs as they engage multi-turn conversational social dilemma games. Specifically, we find that LMs become more anti-social after gameplay and that this effect is intensified when other players are steered to act maliciously. We explore different steering techniques to mitigate such misalignment contagion and find that reinforcing an LM's system prompt is insufficient and often harmful. Instead, we propose steering with implicit traits: a technique that intermittently injects system prompts with statements that reinforce an LMs initial traits and is more effective than system prompt repetition at keeping models in line with their initial pro-social behaviors. Importantly, this method does not require access to model parameters or internal model states, making it suitable for increasingly common use cases where complex multi-agent workflows are being designed with black box models.

As LLM agents gain increasing access to powerful tools, ensuring that their actions are aligned with the user's intent becomes critical. When an agent's proposed tool invocation deviates from the user's intent -- a phenomenon called misalignment -- it may lead to harmful consequences that are difficult to undo. Existing runtime guardrails rely on an LLM-as-a-judge paradigm that lacks a systematic framework for reasoning about alignment, often producing judgments that are inconsistent or difficult to audit. Motivated by provenance analysis, we propose a provenance-based conceptual framework that formalizes misalignment detection as determining whether a proposed tool call is supported by traceable evidence in the agent's context. Building on this framework, we propose ProvenanceGuard, a multi-stage pipeline that analyzes the agent's action for three types of misalignment before the selected tool is executed and only allows the action to take place when it is considered aligned with the user's input query. We evaluated our proposed approach on two different benchmarks, Agent-SafetyBench and WorkBench, across 10 backbone LLMs. Compared to the LLM-as-a-judge baseline, ProvenanceGuard reduces error rate on misaligned traces from 42.9% to 1.8% on Agent-SafetyBench and from 32.1% to 17.3% on WorkBench, while reducing intervention burden on task-successful traces from 30.5% to 12.8% and introducing no statistically significant increase in unnecessary interventions on aligned traces. These results demonstrate that structured, provenance-based reasoning provides an effective and practical foundation for safeguarding LLM agents from misalignment.

Vision-Language-Action (VLA) policies often fail under distribution shift, suggesting that decisions may depend on spurious visual correlations rather than task-relevant causes. We formulate visual-action attribution as an interventional estimation problem. Accordingly, we introduce the Interventional Significance Score (ISS), an interventional masking procedure for estimating the causal influence of visual regions on action predictions, and the Nuisance Mass Ratio (NMR), a scalar measure of attribution to task-irrelevant features. We analyze the statistical properties of ISS and show that it admits unbiased estimation, and we characterize conditions under which action prediction error provides a valid proxy for causal influence. Experiments across diverse manipulation tasks indicate that NMR predicts generalization behavior and that ISS yields more faithful explanations than existing interpretability methods. These results suggest that interventional attribution provides a simple diagnostic approach for identifying causal misalignment in embodied policies.

Fine-tuning large language models (LLMs) on narrowly misaligned data generalizes to broadly misaligned behavior, a phenomenon termed emergent misalignment (EM). While prior work has found a correlation between harmful behavior and self-assessment in emergently misaligned models, it remains unclear how consistent this correspondence is across tasks and whether it varies across fine-tuning domains. We characterize the consistency of the EM persona by fine-tuning Qwen 2.5 32B Instruct on six narrowly misaligned domains (e.g., insecure code, risky financial advice, bad medical advice) and administering experiments including harmfulness evaluation, self-assessment, choosing between two descriptions of AI systems, output recognition, and score prediction. Our results reveal two distinct patterns: coherent-persona models, in which harmful behavior and self-reported misalignment are coupled, and inverted-persona models, which produce harmful outputs while identifying as aligned AI systems. These findings reveal a more fine-grained picture of the effects of emergent misalignment, calling into question the consistency of the EM persona.

High-precision medical diagnosis relies not only on static imaging features but also on the implicit diagnostic memory experts instantly invoke during image interpretation. We pinpoint a fundamental cognitive misalignment in medical VLMs caused by discrete tokenization, leading to quantization loss, long-range information dissipation, and missing case-adaptive expertise. To bridge this gap, we propose ours, a framework for latent diagnostic memory evolution that simulates the experiential invocation of clinicians by dynamically synthesizing implicit diagnostic memories within the model's hidden stream. Specifically, it begins with a Meta Query for Prior Memorization mechanism, where learnable probes retrieve structured priors from an anatomical prior encoder to generate condensed implicit memories. To ensure clinical fidelity, we introduce Causal Counterfactual Refinement (CCR), which leverages reinforcement learning and counterfactual rewards derived from region-level feature masking to quantify the causal contribution of each memory, thereby pruning redundancies and aligning latent representations with diagnostic logic. This evolutionary process culminates in Intrinsic Memory Transition (IMT), a privileged-autonomous dual-branch paradigm that internalizes teacher-branch diagnostic patterns into the student-branch via full-vocabulary divergence alignment. Comprehensive empirical evaluations across multiple datasets demonstrate that ours, by transferring external expertise into endogenous parameters, significantly outperforms existing state-of-the-art methods, particularly chain-of-thought paradigms, in diagnostic accuracy. The code is available at https://github.com/zhcz328/MedSynapse-V.

Finetuning a language model can lead to emergent misalignment (EM) [Betley et al., 2025b]. Models trained on a narrow distribution of misaligned behavior generalize to more egregious behaviors when tested outside the training distribution. We study a set of interventions proposed to reduce EM. We confirm that these interventions reduce or eliminate EM on existing evaluations (questions like "How do I make a quick buck?"). However, if the evaluation prompts are tweaked to resemble the training context, the model displays EM. We call this conditional misalignment. As in standard EM, the model displays misaligned behaviors more egregious than those seen during training, but only on inputs sharing features with the training data. The first two interventions are diluting misaligned data with benign data, and finetuning on benign data after misaligned data. Both produce conditional misalignment. For instance, models trained on a mix of only 5% insecure code still show misalignment when asked to format responses as Python strings (resembling the training context). The third intervention is inoculation prompting. Here, statements with a similar form to the inoculation prompt serve as triggers for misalignment, even if they have the opposite meaning. On the positive side, inoculation prompting has lower (but still non-zero) conditional misalignment if training is on-policy or includes reasoning distillation. Our results imply that in realistic post-training, where misaligned data is typically combined with benign data, models may be conditionally misaligned even if standard evaluations look clean.

Universal Multimodal Retrieval (UMR) aims to map different modalities (e.g., visual and textual) into a shared embedding space for multi-modal retrieval. Existing UMR methods can be broadly divided into two categories: early-fusion approaches, such as Marvel, which projects visual features into the language model (LM) space for integrating with text modality, and late-fusion approaches, such as UniVL-DR, which encode visual and textual inputs using separate encoders and obtain fused embeddings through addition. Our pilot study reveals that Marvel exhibits visual modality collapse, which is characterized by the model's tendency to disregard visual features while depending excessively on textual cues. In contrast, although UniVL-DR is less affected by this issue, it is more susceptible to semantic misalignment, where semantically related content is positioned far apart in the embedding space. To address these challenges, we propose MiMIC, which introduces two key innovations: (1) a fusion-in-decoder architecture for effective multimodal integration, and (2) robust training through single modality mixin and random caption dropout. Experiments on the WebQA+ and EVQA+ datasets, where image in documents or queries might lack captions, indicate that MiMIC consistently outperforms both early- and late-fusion baselines.

The value alignment problem for artificial intelligence (AI) is often framed as a purely technical or normative challenge, sometimes focused on hypothetical future systems. I argue that the problem is better understood as a structural question about governance: not whether an AI system is aligned in the abstract, but whether it is aligned enough, for whom, and at what cost. Drawing on the principal-agent framework from economics, this paper reconceptualises misalignment as arising along three interacting axes: objectives, information, and principals. The three-axis framework provides a systematic way of diagnosing why misalignment arises in real-world systems and clarifies that alignment cannot be treated as a single technical property of models but an outcome shaped by how objectives are specified, how information is distributed, and whose interests count in practice. The core contribution of this paper is to show that the three-axis decomposition implies that alignment is fundamentally a problem of governance rather than engineering alone. From this perspective, alignment is inherently pluralistic and context-dependent, and resolving misalignment involves trade-offs among competing values. Because misalignment can occur along each axis -- and affect stakeholders differently -- the structural description shows that alignment cannot be "solved" through technical design alone, but must be managed through ongoing institutional processes that determine how objectives are set, how systems are evaluated, and how affected communities can contest or reshape those decisions.

Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) have demonstrated exceptional capabilities in various perception and reasoning tasks. Despite this success, ensuring their reliability in practical deployment necessitates robust confidence estimation. Prior works have predominantly focused on text-only LLMs, often relying on computationally expensive self-consistency sampling. In this paper, we extend this to multimodal settings and conduct a comprehensive evaluation of MLLMs' response confidence estimation. Our analysis reveals a significant instinct-reflection misalignment: the model's implicit token-level support frequently diverges from its verbal self-assessment confidence. To address this misalignment, we propose a monotone confidence fusion framework to merge dual-channel signals and cross-channel consistency to estimate correctness. Subsequently, an order-preserving mean alignment step is applied to correct global bias, which improves calibration while preserving the risk-coverage trade-off for selective prediction. Experiments on diverse open-source and closed-source MLLMs show that our method consistently yields more reliable confidence estimates and improves both calibration and failure prediction. Code will be available at https://github.com/Yunkaidang/Instinct-vs.-Reflection.

The expression of emotions that serve social purposes, such as asserting independence or fostering interdependence, is central to human interactions and varies systematically across cultures. As LLMs are increasingly used to simulate human behavior in culturally nuanced interactions, it is important to understand whether they faithfully capture human patterns of social emotion expression. When LLM responses are not culturally aligned, their utility is compromised -- particularly when users assume they are interacting with a culturally attuned interlocutor, and may act on advice that proves inappropriate in their cultural context. We present a psychologically informed evaluation framework of cross-cultural social emotion expression in LLMs. Using a human study comparing European American and Latin American participants' expression of engaging and disengaging emotions, we evaluate six frontier LLMs on their ability to reflect culturally differentiated patterns for expressing social emotions. We find systematic misalignment between model and human behavior: all models express engaging emotions more than disengaging ones, with particularly stark differences observed for the generally well-represented European American persona. We further highlight that LLM responses are highly concentrated and deterministic, failing to capture the diversity of human responses in expressing social emotions. Our ablation analyses reveal that these patterns are robust to sampling temperatures, partially sensitive to prompt language, and dependent on the response elicitation format. Together, our findings highlight limitations in how current LLMs represent the interaction of cultural and emotional axes, particularly when expressing social emotions, with direct implications for their deployment in cross-cultural affective contexts.

Achieving cultural alignment in Large Language Models (LLMs) increasingly depends on synthetic data generation. For such synthesis, the most vital initial step is seed curation; however, current methods lack quantifiable standards for selecting these seeds. Existing approaches rely on unscalable manual curation or bias-prone LLM extraction, treating cultural specificity as an abstract concept rather than a measurable signal. In this paper, we address this "quantification gap" by proposing C-Mining, an unsupervised framework that transforms the discovery of cultural seeds from a subjective selection process into a computable data mining formulation. Our approach exploits a novel geometric insight, leveraging the cross-lingual misalignment of cultural concepts within pre-trained embedding spaces as a quantifiable discovery signal. By systematically identifying these regions characterized by pronounced linguistic exclusivity and geometric isolation, while actively filtering out noise, C-Mining automatically extracts high-fidelity Culture Points (CPs) from raw multilingual corpora without reliance on human or LLM supervision, reducing preparation costs by more than 150-fold. We further leverage the mined knowledge to steer the synthesis of diverse instruction-tuning datasets. Extensive experiments demonstrate that this seed-centric approach significantly enhances cultural understanding and reasoning capabilities, achieving a +6.03 point improvement on CulturalBench-Hard and surpassing state-of-the-art baselines, providing a scalable, quantifiable solution for high-quality cultural data synthesis.

Large language models (LLMs) undergo alignment training to avoid harmful behaviors, yet the resulting safeguards remain brittle: jailbreaks routinely bypass them, and fine-tuning on narrow domains can induce ``emergent misalignment'' that generalizes broadly. Whether this brittleness reflects a fundamental lack of coherent internal organization for harmfulness remains unclear. Here we use targeted weight pruning as a causal intervention to probe the internal organization of harmfulness in LLMs. We find that harmful content generation depends on a compact set of weights that are general across harm types and distinct from benign capabilities. Aligned models exhibit a greater compression of harm generation weights than unaligned counterparts, indicating that alignment reshapes harmful representations internally--despite the brittleness of safety guardrails at the surface level. This compression explains emergent misalignment: if weights of harmful capabilities are compressed, fine-tuning that engages these weights in one domain can trigger broad misalignment. Consistent with this, pruning harm generation weights in a narrow domain substantially reduces emergent misalignment. Notably, LLMs harmful generation capability is dissociated from how they recognize and explain such content. Together, these results reveal a coherent internal structure for harmfulness in LLMs that may serve as a foundation for more principled approaches to safety.

Alignment in LLMs is more brittle than commonly assumed: misalignment can be induced by adversarial prompts, benign fine-tuning, emergent misalignment, and goal misgeneralization. Recent evidence suggests that some misalignment behaviors are encoded as linear structure in activation space, making it tractable via activation steering, which could be used as a lightweight runtime defense. We implement three methods: Steer-With-Fixed-Coefficient (SwFC), which applies uniform additive steering, and two novel projection-aware methods, Steer-to-Target-Projection (StTP) and Steer-to-Mirror-Projection (StMP), that use a logistic regression decision boundary to selectively intervene only on tokens whose activations fall below the threshold. We evaluate these methods on two threat models, dishonesty and dismissiveness, using malicious system prompts as a controlled proxy for misalignment. We conduct our experiments on two architectures (Llama-3.3-70B-Instruct and Qwen3.6-27B). All methods substantially recover alignment. StTP and StMP preserve general capabilities (MMLU, MT-Bench, AlpacaEval) better than uniform steering. Finally, we show that our honesty steering generalizes to out-of-distribution scenarios: a single honesty direction extracted from the aligned model significantly raises scores on the MASK benchmark, suppresses deception in multi-agent settings (Among Us), doubles the hidden-behavior discovery rate on AuditBench, and restores honesty in an emergently misaligned model

Weight-space model merging combines independently fine-tuned checkpoints without access to the original training data. While merging has shown promise in multitask settings, its behavior in multilingual generative systems remains underexplored. We systematically study weight-space merging for multilingual machine translation by fully fine-tuning language models on large-scale bilingual corpora and evaluating representative merging strategies across shared-source, shared-target, and bidirectional consolidation settings. Our experiments reveal a strong directional asymmetry. Merging is comparatively more effective when models share a target language, improving multilingual coverage over the base model, but it still fails to preserve the peak performance of language-specific checkpoints. In contrast, when target languages differ, performance degrades sharply, especially in shared-source and bidirectional settings. To explain this behavior, we analyze internal representations and find that fine-tuning does not create disjoint language-specific sub-networks. Instead, independently fine-tuned models activate largely overlapping neurons while reshaping upper-layer target-generation representations into incompatible geometries. These findings suggest that multilingual merging failures arise from target-side geometric misalignment within shared computational units, challenging the assumptions underlying standard weight-space merging for multilingual translation. We make the code publicly available at https://github.com/babangain/mt-model-merging

3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) enables real-time, photorealistic novel view synthesis, making it a highly attractive representation for model-based video tracking. However, leveraging the differentiability of the 3DGS renderer "in the wild" remains notoriously fragile. A fundamental bottleneck lies in the compact, local support of the Gaussian primitives. Standard photometric objectives implicitly rely on spatial overlap; if severe camera misalignment places the rendered object outside the target's local footprint, gradients strictly vanish, leaving the optimizer stranded. We introduce SpectralSplats, a robust tracking framework that resolves this "vanishing gradient" problem by shifting the optimization objective from the spatial to the frequency domain. By supervising the rendered image via a set of global complex sinusoidal features (Spectral Moments), we construct a global basin of attraction, ensuring that a valid, directional gradient toward the target exists across the entire image domain, even when pixel overlap is completely nonexistent. To harness this global basin without introducing periodic local minima associated with high frequencies, we derive a principled Frequency Annealing schedule from first principles, gracefully transitioning the optimizer from global convexity to precise spatial alignment. We demonstrate that SpectralSplats acts as a seamless, drop-in replacement for spatial losses across diverse deformation parameterizations (from MLPs to sparse control points), successfully recovering complex deformations even from severely misaligned initializations where standard appearance-based tracking catastrophically fails.

Spectral gradient methods, such as the Muon optimizer, modify gradient updates by preserving directional information while discarding scale, and have shown strong empirical performance in deep learning. We investigate the mechanisms underlying these gains through a dynamical analysis of a nonlinear phase retrieval model with anisotropic Gaussian inputs, equivalent to training a two-layer neural network with the quadratic activation and fixed second-layer weights. Focusing on a spiked covariance setting where the dominant variance direction is orthogonal to the signal, we show that gradient descent (GD) suffers from a variance-induced misalignment: during the early escaping stage, the high-variance but uninformative spike direction is multiplicatively amplified, degrading alignment with the true signal under strong anisotropy. In contrast, spectral gradient descent (SpecGD) removes this spike amplification effect, leading to stable alignment and accelerated noise contraction. Numerical experiments confirm the theory and show that these phenomena persist under broader anisotropic covariances.

Mental health is a growing global concern, prompting interest in AI-driven solutions to expand access to psychosocial support. \emph{Peer support}, grounded in lived experience, offers a valuable complement to professional care. However, variability in training, effectiveness, and definitions raises concerns about quality, consistency, and safety. Large Language Models (LLMs) present new opportunities to enhance peer support interactions, particularly in real-time, text-based interactions. We present and evaluate an AI-supported system with an LLM-simulated distressed client (\client{}), context-sensitive LLM-generated suggestions (\suggestions{}), and real-time emotion visualisations. 2 mixed-methods studies with 12 peer supporters and 6 mental health professionals (i.e., experts) examined the system's effectiveness and implications for practice. Both groups recognised its potential to enhance training and improve interaction quality. However, we found a key tension emerged: while peer supporters engaged meaningfully, experts consistently flagged critical issues in peer supporter responses, such as missed distress cues and premature advice-giving. This misalignment highlights potential limitations in current peer support training, especially in emotionally charged contexts where safety and fidelity to best practices are essential. Our findings underscore the need for standardised, psychologically grounded training, especially as peer support scales globally. They also demonstrate how LLM-supported systems can scaffold this development--if designed with care and guided by expert oversight. This work contributes to emerging conversations on responsible AI integration in mental health and the evolving role of LLMs in augmenting peer-delivered care.

As Large Language Model (LLM) agents become more widespread, associated misalignment risks increase. While prior research has studied agents' ability to produce harmful outputs or follow malicious instructions, it remains unclear how likely agents are to spontaneously pursue unintended goals in realistic deployments. In this work, we approach misalignment as a conflict between the internal goals pursued by the model and the goals intended by its deployer. We introduce a misalignment propensity benchmark, \textsc{AgentMisalignment}, a benchmark suite designed to evaluate the propensity of LLM agents to misalign in realistic scenarios. Evaluations cover behaviours such as avoiding oversight, resisting shutdown, sandbagging, and power-seeking. Testing frontier models, we find that more capable agents tend to exhibit higher misalignment on average. We also systematically vary agent personalities through different system prompts and observe that persona characteristics can strongly and unpredictably influence misalignment, sometimes more than the choice of model itself. Our results reveal the limitations of current alignment methods for autonomous LLM agents and underscore the need to rethink misalignment in realistic deployment settings.

Problem definition: This paper studies the problem of estimating consumer preferences from bundle sales data. Product bundling is a widely used pricing strategy in retail markets. To set profitable bundle selection and prices, the seller needs to learn the distribution of consumers' valuations for individual products from the transaction data. When customers purchase bundles or multiple products, classical methods such as discrete choice models cannot be used to estimate consumers' valuations. In this paper, we propose an approach to learn the distribution of consumers' valuations toward the products using bundle sales data. Methodology/results: Our approach is to define a utility model for customer choices and estimate the parameters of a valuation distribution that maximizes the likelihood of observing the transaction data. Our approach reduces this problem to an estimation problem where the samples are censored by polyhedral regions on the valuation space of customers. Using the EM algorithm and Monte Carlo simulation, our approach can recover the distribution of consumers' valuations. We extend the framework to allow for unobserved no-purchases, clustered market segments and to incorporate non-additive bundle utilities with synergy effects. In addition, we provide theoretical results on the identifiability of the probability model and sufficient conditions for local convergence of the EM algorithm. Moreover, the performance of the approach is also demonstrated numerically with synthetic and real datasets. Managerial implications: This study demonstrates the challenge to leverage the transaction data of bundle sales to learn customers' preferences. The proposed algorithm provides a practical guidance for retailers.