Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 cited by

Controllable Safety Alignment: Inference-Time Adaptation to Diverse Safety Requirements

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 2410.08968 v2 pith:ZJX7T3SC submitted 2024-10-11 cs.CL cs.AI

classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords safetydiversemodelalignmentconfigsllmsmodelsrequirements
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

The current paradigm for safety alignment of large language models (LLMs) follows a one-size-fits-all approach: the model refuses to interact with any content deemed unsafe by the model provider. This approach lacks flexibility in the face of varying social norms across cultures and regions. In addition, users may have diverse safety needs, making a model with static safety standards too restrictive to be useful, as well as too costly to be re-aligned. We propose Controllable Safety Alignment (CoSA), a framework designed to adapt models to diverse safety requirements without re-training. Instead of aligning a fixed model, we align models to follow safety configs -- free-form natural language descriptions of the desired safety behaviors -- that are provided as part of the system prompt. To adjust model safety behavior, authorized users only need to modify such safety configs at inference time. To enable that, we propose CoSAlign, a data-centric method for aligning LLMs to easily adapt to diverse safety configs. Furthermore, we devise a novel controllability evaluation protocol that considers both helpfulness and configured safety, summarizing them into CoSA-Score, and construct CoSApien, a human-authored benchmark that consists of real-world LLM use cases with diverse safety requirements and corresponding evaluation prompts. We show that CoSAlign leads to substantial gains of controllability over strong baselines including in-context alignment. Our framework encourages better representation and adaptation to pluralistic human values in LLMs, and thereby increasing their practicality.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

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

  1. Many-Tier Instruction Hierarchy in LLM Agents

    cs.CL 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

    ManyIH and ManyIH-Bench address instruction conflicts in LLM agents with up to 12 privilege levels across 853 tasks, revealing frontier models achieve only ~40% accuracy.

  2. Reasoning Up the Instruction Ladder for Controllable Language Models

    cs.CL 2025-10 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    RLVR on ~7K verifiable system/user conflict examples teaches LLMs to prioritize higher-priority instructions, improving instruction-hierarchy and safety benchmarks.

  3. NeuronTune: Fine-Grained Neuron Modulation for Balanced Safety-Utility Alignment in LLMs

    cs.LG 2025-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    NeuronTune identifies sparse safety and utility neurons via attack-aware attribution, optimizes per-neuron scaling factors with MAML, and reports a better safety-utility balance than layer-wise alignment methods.

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

    cs.AI 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    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.

  5. A Survey on Training-free Alignment of Large Language Models

    cs.CL 2025-08 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A survey that catalogs and categorizes training-free LLM alignment methods into pre-decoding, in-decoding, and post-decoding, with a limited experimental comparison on one model.

Pith tools