REVIEW 4 cited by
On the Role of Attention Heads in Large Language Model Safety
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
Large language models (LLMs) achieve state-of-the-art performance on multiple language tasks, yet their safety guardrails can be circumvented, leading to harmful generations. In light of this, recent research on safety mechanisms has emerged, revealing that when safety representations or component are suppressed, the safety capability of LLMs are compromised. However, existing research tends to overlook the safety impact of multi-head attention mechanisms, despite their crucial role in various model functionalities. Hence, in this paper, we aim to explore the connection between standard attention mechanisms and safety capability to fill this gap in the safety-related mechanistic interpretability. We propose a novel metric which tailored for multi-head attention, the Safety Head ImPortant Score (Ships), to assess the individual heads' contributions to model safety. Based on this, we generalize Ships to the dataset level and further introduce the Safety Attention Head AttRibution Algorithm (Sahara) to attribute the critical safety attention heads inside the model. Our findings show that the special attention head has a significant impact on safety. Ablating a single safety head allows aligned model (e.g., Llama-2-7b-chat) to respond to 16 times more harmful queries, while only modifying 0.006% of the parameters, in contrast to the ~ 5% modification required in previous studies. More importantly, we demonstrate that attention heads primarily function as feature extractors for safety and models fine-tuned from the same base model exhibit overlapping safety heads through comprehensive experiments. Together, our attribution approach and findings provide a novel perspective for unpacking the black box of safety mechanisms within large models.
Forward citations
Cited by 4 Pith papers
-
How Do LLMs Read Bug Reports? An Empirical Study of Attention in LLMs for Automated Program Repair
LLM program-repair success is associated with diffuse attention across diagnostic bug-report content, while failures correlate with over-focus on metadata such as version information.
-
SafeMobile: Chain-level Jailbreak Detection and Automated Evaluation for Multimodal Mobile Agents
A history-aware guard model with an LLM judge is reported to cut jailbreak success on mobile agent tasks from 86.1% to 8.4% while keeping task completion unchanged at 77.8%.
-
Correcting Prompt Dependence in LLM Benchmarks: A Bayesian Hierarchical Model with Embedding-Space Clustering
A Bayesian model that groups similar LLM test prompts into clusters gives better predictive scores than a no-clustering baseline but does not prove that it truly corrects prompt dependence.
-
Boosting Parameter Efficiency in LLM-Based Recommendation through Sophisticated Pruning
PruneRec prunes attention heads, embedding dimensions, MLP units, and layers from a recommendation-tuned LLM, retaining 88% of accuracy with under 5% of non-embedding parameters.
Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.