Papers › Step-Wise Refusal Dynamics in Autoregressive and Diffusion Language Models
Step-Wise Refusal Dynamics in Autoregressive and Diffusion Language Models
Eliron Rahimi, Elad Hirshel, Rom Himelstein, Amit LeVi, Avi Mendelson, Chaim Baskin
Title, abstract, authors and date from arXiv's metadata (CC0); this paper is not in the Papers with Code archive (frozen 2025-07-28).
Diffusion language models (DLMs) have recently emerged as a competitive alternative to autoregressive (AR) models, offering parallel decoding, competitive generation quality, and initial evidence of improved jailbreak robustness. Despite this progress, the role of sampling mechanisms in shaping refusal behavior remains poorly understood. To address this gap, we present a comprehensive study of step-wise refusal dynamics. We show that diffusion remasking can promote recovery from harmful intermediate generations, provide evidence that this behavior is tied to the sampling mechanism, and demonstrate that switching from AR to diffusion sampling improves jailbreak robustness, including under fixed model weights. To capture generation dynamics not observable at the text level, we propose the Step-Wise Refusal Internal Dynamics (SRI) signal. Consistent with our text-level findings, SRI shows that recovery fails primarily under AR sampling, with these failures often appearing anomalous relative to harmless generations in the SRI space. Based on this observation, we show that SRI enables a simple jailbreak detector that does not modify inference and generalizes to unseen attacks by training only on benign SRI signals. Our evaluation shows that this detector matches or outperforms existing jailbreak detection baselines while adding negligible overhead.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2602.02600")
Code
Syntology Ran 16 of 26 code samples harvested from 3 repositories linked to this paper; 10 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 7 ran · our draft was wrong; 1 ran · fixture could not drive it; 8 ran with no contract checked.
By repository: found in paper text by Syntology: 25 samples from 3 repositories, 15 ran; 1 identical to code first harvested elsewhere. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
26 samples harvested; 16 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 10 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 24 of the 26 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from 3 repositories linked to this paper, official or community; each sample names its own and says which. Some samples are identical code Syntology first harvested from another repository; for those, this paper's copy is not located and its licence is not recorded. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
c3a6b977022957cb · report
1495eea6ced11dfa · report
1f6ae43d06c76ba5 · report
f9abf6d74699cc1c · report
988a5f5b97b3ed17 · report
195f48aece3499e6 · report
a8366f238618edad · report
11f07821d1b2286b · report
1975e0c51e6f5753 · report
39c9954d6f0c856e · report
53202c68f703b2ab · report
54486de625187d2a · report
3137073275f8c21a · report
0e7f77d6003e2412 · report
2d82abbef2c4addb · report
72a32148829c38b2 · report
615ec9b280bef7c6 · report
3e3a6bc56d604874 · report
afd61e748d6c23ce · report
376bf22d5737fc2a · report
bc58c88b365ae743 · report
b7cee2ce433da95c · report
65934529afeabeff · report
3e268fcaaf4273fe · report
33338f20f5619c59 · report
b5472673332de78e · report
Results from the paper
The Papers with Code archive ends with its 2025-07-28 snapshot. This paper's arXiv identifier, 2602.02600, was issued in February 2026, after that date, so the archive has no leaderboard rows for it.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections