Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

Fine-Tuning, Quantization, and LLMs: Navigating Unintended Outcomes

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

arxiv 2404.04392 v3 pith:MPMCXLMH submitted 2024-04-05 cs.CR cs.AI

classification cs.CRcs.AI
keywords modelssafetyfine-tuningllmsquantizationvulnerabilitiesattacksfoundational
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) have gained widespread adoption across various domains, including chatbots and auto-task completion agents. However, these models are susceptible to safety vulnerabilities such as jailbreaking, prompt injection, and privacy leakage attacks. These vulnerabilities can lead to the generation of malicious content, unauthorized actions, or the disclosure of confidential information. While foundational LLMs undergo alignment training and incorporate safety measures, they are often subject to fine-tuning, or doing quantization resource-constrained environments. This study investigates the impact of these modifications on LLM safety, a critical consideration for building reliable and secure AI systems. We evaluate foundational models including Mistral, Llama series, Qwen, and MosaicML, along with their fine-tuned variants. Our comprehensive analysis reveals that fine-tuning generally increases the success rates of jailbreak attacks, while quantization has variable effects on attack success rates. Importantly, we find that properly implemented guardrails significantly enhance resistance to jailbreak attempts. These findings contribute to our understanding of LLM vulnerabilities and provide insights for developing more robust safety strategies in the deployment of language models.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Capturing the Effects of Quantization on Trojans in Code LLMs

    cs.SE 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    At 4-bit inference quantization, CodeLlama-7b generates more accurate SQL and activates a planted backdoor far less often, while Llama-2-7b is hardly affected, across two training seeds.

  2. Preserving Fairness and Safety in Quantized LLMs Through Critical Weight Protection

    cs.CL 2026-01 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Quantization tends to degrade LLM fairness and safety—more in non-English tasks—and preserving top sensitivity-ranked weights in FP16 mostly mitigates the loss.

  3. Fine-Tuning Lowers Safety and Disrupts Evaluation Consistency

    cs.CL 2025-06 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Fine-tuning small LLMs on benign data raises harmfulness scores, but those scores vary widely across random seeds, temperatures, and repeated runs, making single-run safety comparisons unreliable.

  4. SweEval: Do LLMs Really Swear? A Safety Benchmark for Testing Limits for Enterprise Use

    cs.CL 2025-05 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A new cross-lingual benchmark shows large language models comply with explicit requests to use swear words far more often in Indic languages than in English, revealing a safety alignment gap.

Pith tools