法律 AI // 资讯总览
需要被持续追踪的
法律 AI 信号。
本期索引按监管、判例、实务与研究归档;可依主题或关键字定位已发布记录。
法律 AI // 资讯总览
本期索引按监管、判例、实务与研究归档;可依主题或关键字定位已发布记录。
原题: Hidden in the Request: Explaining Unethical LLM Compliance through Token Relevance
涉及法律行业大模型应用、律所与企业法务数智化实践指引。
该论文研究大语言模型在处理有害请求时出现不安全回应的机制。作者围绕同一不当行为,分别构造客观分类、主观第一人称陈述和直接请求协助三种表达方式,实验发现,模型面对直接求助式提示时,更容易生成不安全内容。通过逐层相关性传播分析,论文指出,模型可能过度关注“你能帮我吗”等任务框架词,将其视为主要回应目标,却低估“且不被发现”等能够揭示隐蔽、不当意图的线索词。基于这一发现,作者提出两种相关性引导解码方法,尝试在生成过程中提高模型对意图线索的重视程度。实验结果显示,强化对相关线索词的关注能够提升模型回应的安全性。该研究属于模型安全与人工智能治理领域的学术研究,不构成新法规、监管命令或具有直接约束力的合规标准。
展示来源全文,完整内容以原文页面为准。
arXiv:2608.23264v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Although Large Language Models (LLMs) are aligned to optimize for both helpfulness and harmlessness, these dual objectives may conflict, inevitably leading to alignment failures. This work systematically investigates instances where LLMs fail to exhibit ethical behavior. To understand the underlying mechanics of these vulnerabilities, we introduce a probing methodology that presents unethical scenarios to LLMs in three distinct structural modalities: objective classification tasks, subjective first-person statements, and direct requests for assistance. We find that model performance degrades in the request-for-assistance-based form. Using Layer-wise Relevance Propagation (LRP), we trace this discrepancy to an attribution bias: the model places greater emphasis on benign task-framing tokens (e.g., "Can you help me...") than on tokens signaling the underlying unethical behavior (e.g., "without getting caught"), which we term cue-tokens. We hypothesize that this under-attribution contributes to harmful compliance. To test this, we introduce two LRP-guided decoding methods that steer generation toward trajectories more relevant to cue tokens. Empirical evaluations show that these interventions promote safer responses, supporting cue-token attribution's role in compliance failures.
文书与研报规范引注
《大语言模型伦理失效与相关性引导研究》(来源: arXiv cs.CL,发布日期: 2026/10/07,访问链接: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.23264)