Pith. sign in

REVIEW 17 cited by

Steering Language Model Refusal with Sparse Autoencoders

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 2411.11296 v2 pith:CH2BG5A2 submitted 2024-11-18 cs.LG

Steering Language Model Refusal with Sparse Autoencoders

classification cs.LG
keywords modellanguagerefusalsteeringwhilefeaturescapabilitiesgeneral
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Responsible deployment of language models requires mechanisms for refusing unsafe prompts while preserving model performance. While most approaches modify model weights through additional training, we explore an alternative: steering model activations at inference time via amplifying sparse autoencoder (SAE) features that mediate refusal. This work uncovers a fundamental tension between SAE steering-based safety improvements and general model capabilities. While feature steering successfully improves robustness against both single-turn and challenging multi-turn jailbreak attempts, we discover that this comes at a previously underexplored cost -- systematic degradation of performance across multiple benchmark tasks, even on safe inputs with no apparent connection to refusal behavior. This suggests that features mediating refusal may be more deeply entangled with general language model capabilities than previously understood. Our findings reveal important open questions about the nature of safety-relevant features in language models and the feasibility of isolating them for targeted intervention. While SAE-based steering shows promise as a flexible approach to enhancing language model safety, our results highlight the critical need to understand and address the mechanisms behind these capability tradeoffs before such techniques can be practically deployed.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 17 Pith papers

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

  1. When Is Rank-1 Steering Cheap? Geometry, Granularity, and Budgeted Search

    cs.LG 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Prompt-boundary directional alignment enables geometry-guided search that cuts trials to 95% best utility by 39.8% on average, while concept granularity predicts remaining difficulty via directional heterogeneity.

  2. When Is Rank-1 Steering Cheap? Geometry, Granularity, and Budgeted Search

    cs.LG 2026-05 conditional novelty 7.0

    Rank-1 activation steering is often cheap when prompt-boundary alignment guides budgeted search and concept granularity diagnoses directional stability, with the GRACE framework reducing trials to 95% utility by 39.8%...

  3. LLM Advertisement based on Neuron Auctions

    cs.LG 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Neuron Auctions auction continuous neuron intervention budgets on brand-specific orthogonal subspaces in LLMs to achieve strategy-proof revenue optimization while penalizing user utility loss.

  4. Pre-Intervention Prediction of Sparse Autoencoder Steering Side Effects

    cs.LG 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Pre-intervention feature statistics predict SAE steering modularity (stability and collateral spread) better than baselines across multiple models and dictionaries, with model-dependent success in held-out selection.

  5. Perplexity Can Miss SAE Feature Damage Under Quantization

    cs.LG 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Quantization of LLMs can degrade many SAE features even when perplexity improves or stays similar, as shown by correlation measurements on frozen SAEs for Pythia-70M and Gemma-2-2B models across INT8 to INT4.

  6. Don't Lose Focus: Activation Steering via Key-Orthogonal Projections

    cs.CL 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    SKOP uses key-orthogonal projections to steer LLM activations while preserving attention patterns on focus tokens, cutting utility degradation by 5-7x and retaining over 95% of standard steering efficacy.

  7. Estimating Tail Risks in Language Model Output Distributions

    cs.LG 2026-04 conditional novelty 6.0

    Importance sampling via activation-steered unsafe proposal models estimates rare harmful-output probabilities in language models with 10-20x fewer samples than brute-force Monte Carlo.

  8. Estimating Tail Risks in Language Model Output Distributions

    cs.LG 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Importance sampling with unsafe model variants estimates tail probabilities of harmful language model outputs using 10-20x fewer samples than brute-force Monte Carlo.

  9. Towards Understanding the Robustness of Sparse Autoencoders

    cs.LG 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Integrating pretrained sparse autoencoders into LLM residual streams reduces jailbreak success rates by up to 5x across multiple models and attacks.

  10. Dictionary-Aligned Concept Control for Safeguarding Multimodal LLMs

    cs.LG 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    DACO curates a 15,000-concept dictionary from 400K image-caption pairs and uses it to initialize an SAE that enables granular, concept-specific steering of MLLM activations, raising safety scores on MM-SafetyBench and...

  11. Beyond I'm Sorry, I Can't: Dissecting Large Language Model Refusal

    cs.CL 2025-09 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Sparse autoencoders plus greedy filtering and factorization-machine interaction modeling identify minimal sets of features in Gemma-2-2B-IT and LLaMA-3.1-8B-IT whose ablation produces jailbreaks by flipping refusal to...

  12. Palette: A Modular, Controllable, and Efficient Framework for On-demand Authorized Safety Alignment Relaxation in LLMs

    cs.AI 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Palette identifies refusal directions via multi-objective search, internalizes them through lightweight adaptation, and supports on-demand multi-domain authorization via independent learning and parameter merging.

  13. Steered Generation via Gradient-Based Optimization on Sparse Query Features

    cs.LG 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Prototype-Based Sparse Steering decomposes query activations with SAEs and optimizes sparse features via gradients to steer LLM outputs toward specific behaviors.

  14. Ablating Safety: Mechanisms for Removing Alignment in Language Models for Security Applications

    cs.CR 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Empirical comparison of alignment ablation methods on a 60-prompt security evaluation suite shows task-only LoRA achieves 0.87 mean security score with 0.13 unsafe compliance.

  15. The Latent Space: Foundation, Evolution, Mechanism, Ability, and Outlook

    cs.AI 2026-04 accept novelty 5.0

    A large survey organizes latent-space work in language-based models by foundation, evolution, four mechanisms, seven abilities, and open challenges.

  16. Forecasting With LLMs: Improved Generalization Through Feature Steering

    cs.CL 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Amplifying time-awareness features in LLMs via sparse autoencoders reduces look-ahead bias in forecasting while preserving general performance.

  17. At the Edge of Understanding: Sparse Autoencoders Trace The Limits of Transformer Generalization

    cs.LG 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0

    Sparse autoencoders show OOD prompts increase fallacious concept activation in transformers, offering a mechanistic measure of shift and a path to robust fine-tuning.