Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Mahmoud, Omar, Khalil, Ali, Semage, Buddhika Laknath, Karimpanal, Thommen George, Rana, Santu
Format: Preprint
Published: 2025
Subjects:
Online Access:https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.07775
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1866917234032508928
author Mahmoud, Omar
Khalil, Ali
Semage, Buddhika Laknath
Karimpanal, Thommen George
Rana, Santu
author_facet Mahmoud, Omar
Khalil, Ali
Semage, Buddhika Laknath
Karimpanal, Thommen George
Rana, Santu
contents Hallucination in large language models (LLMs) has been widely studied in recent years, with progress in both detection and mitigation aimed at improving truthfulness. Yet, a critical side effect remains largely overlooked: enhancing truthfulness can negatively impact safety alignment. In this paper, we investigate this trade-off and show that increasing factual accuracy often comes at the cost of weakened refusal behavior. Our analysis reveals that this arises from overlapping components in the model that simultaneously encode hallucination and refusal information, leading alignment methods to suppress factual knowledge unintentionally. We further examine how fine-tuning on benign datasets, even when curated for safety, can degrade alignment for the same reason. To address this, we propose a method that disentangles refusal-related features from hallucination features using sparse autoencoders, and preserves refusal behavior during fine-tuning through subspace orthogonalization. This approach prevents hallucinations from increasing while maintaining safety alignment.We evaluate our method on commonsense reasoning tasks and harmful benchmarks (AdvBench and StrongReject). Results demonstrate that our approach preserves refusal behavior and task utility, mitigating the trade-off between truthfulness and safety.
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2510_07775
institution arXiv
publishDate 2025
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle The Unintended Trade-off of AI Alignment:Balancing Hallucination Mitigation and Safety in LLMs
Mahmoud, Omar
Khalil, Ali
Semage, Buddhika Laknath
Karimpanal, Thommen George
Rana, Santu
Computation and Language
Hallucination in large language models (LLMs) has been widely studied in recent years, with progress in both detection and mitigation aimed at improving truthfulness. Yet, a critical side effect remains largely overlooked: enhancing truthfulness can negatively impact safety alignment. In this paper, we investigate this trade-off and show that increasing factual accuracy often comes at the cost of weakened refusal behavior. Our analysis reveals that this arises from overlapping components in the model that simultaneously encode hallucination and refusal information, leading alignment methods to suppress factual knowledge unintentionally. We further examine how fine-tuning on benign datasets, even when curated for safety, can degrade alignment for the same reason. To address this, we propose a method that disentangles refusal-related features from hallucination features using sparse autoencoders, and preserves refusal behavior during fine-tuning through subspace orthogonalization. This approach prevents hallucinations from increasing while maintaining safety alignment.We evaluate our method on commonsense reasoning tasks and harmful benchmarks (AdvBench and StrongReject). Results demonstrate that our approach preserves refusal behavior and task utility, mitigating the trade-off between truthfulness and safety.
title The Unintended Trade-off of AI Alignment:Balancing Hallucination Mitigation and Safety in LLMs
topic Computation and Language
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.07775