Papers › Safety Measurements for Fine-tuned LLMs Should be Grounded in Capability

Safety Measurements for Fine-tuned LLMs Should be Grounded in Capability

2 Jun 2026arXiv:2606.03648added by Syntology

Krishnapriya Vishnubhotla, Hillary Dawkins, Isar Nejadgholi, Svetlana Kiritchenko

Title, abstract, authors and date from arXiv's metadata (CC0); this paper is not in the Papers with Code archive (frozen 2025-07-28).

Adapting foundation large language models to a user's task or preferred style through fine-tuning can result in compromising the model's safety. Previous works examined the effects of fine-tuning on model safety in limited and seemingly random experimental settings. We argue that anchoring fine-tuning to a specific capability goal is essential for avoiding arbitrary empirical choices, allowing us to draw meaningful conclusions about safety impacts, and to compare mitigation methods on a consistent basis. We conduct a multi-dimensional evaluation of the effects of fine-tuning on model behavior by focusing on capability as well as safety. Our results surface important issues that (1) fine-tuned models can produce incoherent generations in response to safety prompts, (2) automated safety judgments are unreliable for such incoherent outputs, and (3) the conclusions about the effects of fine-tuning can change depending on the choice of safety benchmark as well as the safety evaluator.

PaperPDF

In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.

Code

IBM/SafeLoRA found in paper text by SyntologyApache-2.0 report

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

Syntology holds the repository link but has not harvested or run code from it.

Results from the paper

The Papers with Code archive ends with its 2025-07-28 snapshot. This paper's arXiv identifier, 2606.03648, was issued in June 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