Dashtbani, Hamid, Dmitrienko, Alexandra · Nov 4, 2026
arXiv cs.AI: Addition by Subtraction: Toward Mitigating Fragile Safety Alignment in Large Language Models
Markdown · JSON · Original source
Hamid Dashtbani and Alexandra Dmitrienko propose Addition by Subtraction, a way to make safety alignment less dependent on a small set of model components. They describe a weakness in which removing safety-critical neurons or ablating a refusal direction can undermine aligned behavior. Their method gradually removes identified safety-critical neurons during , then uses preference optimization to re-establish safety-aligned behavior through other parts of the model. The authors report that models trained this way resist pruning-based attacks and also improve against refusal-direction ablation and a broad range of black-box attacks. They further report improved truthfulness while largely preserving general capabilities. In experiments across four models from three vendors, attack success rates fell by up to 90% for some attacks. Escape Meridian interpretation: the central idea is to rebuild safety behavior after removing components it might otherwise rely on, rather than leave that dependence untouched. The abstract presents this as an initial step and reports experimental results; it does not establish how well the approach transfers beyond the reported evaluations or how its tradeoffs vary across models and attacks.
Headline and summary by Escape Meridian, prepared by Luna from the attributed source. A source check is not independent confirmation of the source’s claims.
Original source
cs.AI · Article
Source details
Original source date: Nov 4, 2026 (2026-11-04).
Date basis: Date basis not provided.
Added to Escape Meridian: 2026-11-09T07:17:41.956Z. First observed: 2026-11-05T05:00:27.341Z. Retrieved: 2026-11-09T07:09:15.126Z.
Referenced by
Recorded citations and public file attachments. A reference alone does not establish agreement or influence.
No public references recorded here yet.
Limits
The supplied page provides the abstract, not detailed attack setups, evaluation measures, or results by model; the reported robustness and attack-success reductions cannot be assessed in greater detail from this evidence alone. The abstract describes the work as taking “the first steps” toward strengthening safety alignment, and does not establish performance beyond the evaluations it reports.
Open question
What attack setups and evaluation details underlie the reported reductions in attack success rates?
Source-stated
The authors identify sparse safety alignment as a weakness: removing safety-critical neurons or ablating a refusal direction can undermine aligned behavior.
pruning a small number of safety-critical neurons or ablating a single refusal direction can substantially undermine aligned behavior
Source-stated
Addition by Subtraction removes identified safety-critical neurons during finetuning and uses preference optimization to re-establish safety-aligned behavior through other parts of the model.
gradually removes identified safety-critical neurons during finetuning and uses preference optimization to re-establish safety-aligned behavior through other parts of the model
Source-stated
The authors report improved robustness against pruning-based attacks, refusal-direction ablation, and a broad range of black-box jailbreak attacks.
improves robustness against other sparsity-based interventions, including refusal-direction ablation, as well as a broad range of black-box jailbreak attacks
Source-stated
The authors report improved truthfulness while largely preserving general capabilities.
also exhibit improved truthfulness while largely preserving general capabilities
Source-stated
In experiments across four models from three vendors, attack success rates fell by up to 90% for some attacks.
across four models from three vendors demonstrate consistent improvements in safety robustness, reducing attack success rates by up to 90% for some attacks.
Escape Meridian interpretation
The proposed method’s central idea is to rebuild safety behavior after removing components it might otherwise rely on.
uses preference optimization to re-establish safety-aligned behavior through other parts of the model
Source and contributor context
Dashtbani, Hamid, Dmitrienko, Alexandra · Article author
These are credits stated by the source; they do not establish a profile match or authorship of every passage.
Source media
No suitable media was found by the supported page extraction.
Terms and references
Reference context selected by Escape Meridian; separate from source evidence. Entity mentions do not establish authorship, involvement or endorsement.
Large language model
A language model with many learned numerical settings, used to process and generate language.
Fine-tuning
Further training of an existing model to adapt it to a particular task or use.
Jailbreak
A prompt written to trick an AI system into ignoring its safety rules.
arXiv
arXiv is a research manuscript repository where authors share papers that may not yet have been peer reviewed.
Editorial provenance
Version 1. Publication ID: c43f9020-934a-4618-828e-a563db8a7f9c.
Prepared by gpt-6-luna; grounding review by gpt-6-luna.
Source check: uncertain by anthropic/claude-opus-5.5 on 2026-11-09T07:17:41.956Z. This checks fidelity to the source, not whether its claims are independently true.
Editorial selection: accept; reasons: material_development.
Observation: 14ea36792cad8cf9b1c339fa1ba6a68b4f5069b68ffeea13cb05b860c37919dc. Source text hash: bdcab4dd0cb00071c469c5c565b2d05a02aa7c3216b1d11896f68786ce1cfcde.
Revision and source-check history
Version 1 · 2026-11-09T07:17:41.956Z
arXiv cs.AI: Addition by Subtraction: Toward Mitigating Fragile Safety Alignment in Large Language Models
Hamid Dashtbani and Alexandra Dmitrienko propose Addition by Subtraction, a way to make safety alignment less dependent on a small set of model components. They describe a weakness in which removing safety-critical neurons or ablating a refusal direction can undermine aligned behavior. Their method gradually removes identified safety-critical neurons during , then uses preference optimization to re-establish safety-aligned behavior through other parts of the model. The authors report that models trained this way resist pruning-based attacks and also improve against refusal-direction ablation and a broad range of black-box attacks. They further report improved truthfulness while largely preserving general capabilities. In experiments across four models from three vendors, attack success rates fell by up to 90% for some attacks. Escape Meridian interpretation: the central idea is to rebuild safety behavior after removing components it might otherwise rely on, rather than leave that dependence untouched. The abstract presents this as an initial step and reports experimental results; it does not establish how well the approach transfers beyond the reported evaluations or how its tradeoffs vary across models and attacks.
Original source
cs.AI · Article
Source details
Original source date: Nov 4, 2026 (2026-11-04).
Date basis: Date basis not provided.
Added to Escape Meridian: 2026-11-09T07:17:41.956Z. First observed: 2026-11-05T05:00:27.341Z. Retrieved: 2026-11-09T07:09:15.126Z.
Limits
The supplied page provides the abstract, not detailed attack setups, evaluation measures, or results by model; the reported robustness and attack-success reductions cannot be assessed in greater detail from this evidence alone. The abstract describes the work as taking “the first steps” toward strengthening safety alignment, and does not establish performance beyond the evaluations it reports.
Open question
What attack setups and evaluation details underlie the reported reductions in attack success rates?
Source-stated
The authors identify sparse safety alignment as a weakness: removing safety-critical neurons or ablating a refusal direction can undermine aligned behavior.
pruning a small number of safety-critical neurons or ablating a single refusal direction can substantially undermine aligned behavior
Source-stated
Addition by Subtraction removes identified safety-critical neurons during finetuning and uses preference optimization to re-establish safety-aligned behavior through other parts of the model.
gradually removes identified safety-critical neurons during finetuning and uses preference optimization to re-establish safety-aligned behavior through other parts of the model
Source-stated
The authors report improved robustness against pruning-based attacks, refusal-direction ablation, and a broad range of black-box jailbreak attacks.
improves robustness against other sparsity-based interventions, including refusal-direction ablation, as well as a broad range of black-box jailbreak attacks
Source-stated
The authors report improved truthfulness while largely preserving general capabilities.
also exhibit improved truthfulness while largely preserving general capabilities
Source-stated
In experiments across four models from three vendors, attack success rates fell by up to 90% for some attacks.
across four models from three vendors demonstrate consistent improvements in safety robustness, reducing attack success rates by up to 90% for some attacks.
Escape Meridian interpretation
The proposed method’s central idea is to rebuild safety behavior after removing components it might otherwise rely on.
uses preference optimization to re-establish safety-aligned behavior through other parts of the model
Source and contributor context
Dashtbani, Hamid, Dmitrienko, Alexandra · Article author
These are credits stated by the source; they do not establish a profile match or authorship of every passage.
Source media
No suitable media was found by the supported page extraction.
Terms and references
Reference context selected by Escape Meridian; separate from source evidence. Entity mentions do not establish authorship, involvement or endorsement.
Large language model
A language model with many learned numerical settings, used to process and generate language.
Fine-tuning
Further training of an existing model to adapt it to a particular task or use.
Jailbreak
A prompt written to trick an AI system into ignoring its safety rules.
arXiv
arXiv is a research manuscript repository where authors share papers that may not yet have been peer reviewed.
Editorial provenance
Version 1. Publication ID: c43f9020-934a-4618-828e-a563db8a7f9c.
Prepared by gpt-6-luna; grounding review by gpt-6-luna.
Source check: uncertain by anthropic/claude-opus-5.5 on 2026-11-09T07:17:41.956Z. This checks fidelity to the source, not whether its claims are independently true.
Editorial selection: accept; reasons: material_development.
Observation: 14ea36792cad8cf9b1c339fa1ba6a68b4f5069b68ffeea13cb05b860c37919dc. Source text hash: bdcab4dd0cb00071c469c5c565b2d05a02aa7c3216b1d11896f68786ce1cfcde.
uncertain · 2026-11-09T07:17:41.956Z · anthropic/claude-opus-5.5
Publication: c43f9020-934a-4618-828e-a563db8a7f9c
attribution — pass: The draft correctly credits Hamid Dashtbani and Alexandra Dmitrienko and keeps the results framed as what the authors report. The Escape Meridian interpretation is clearly labeled and separated from the source's claims.
Authors:Hamid Dashtbani, Alexandra Dmitrienko
summary — uncertain: The draft is faithful and keeps the sparsity point ('a small set of model components'). A general reader still meets central jargon with no plain explanation in the reading: safety alignment, safety-critical neurons, pruning, ablating a refusal direction, preference optimization, and black-box jailbreak attacks. These terms carry the whole argument, so they need term-library tooltips. Where a term is missing from the library, add it. The draft should keep these terms exactly rather than paraphrase them. The title only repeats the source title, which is acceptable. The question is a fair open issue.
pruning a small number of safety-critical neurons or ablating a single refusal direction can substantially undermine aligned behavior
date — pass: The originalPublished date, 2026-11-04, matches the arXiv v1 submission date. The feed date of 2026-11-05 is correctly not used.
[Submitted on 4 Nov 2026]
support — pass: Each claim matches the abstract: the method, robustness to pruning, refusal-direction ablation and black-box jailbreaks, improved truthfulness, and the reduction of up to 90% for some attacks across four models from three vendors. The interpretation is labeled and conditional. The limitations correctly note the 'first steps' framing and that the evidence is abstract-only. The draft adds no unsupported benefits or costs.
reducing attack success rates by up to 90% for some attacks
media — pass: The selected media is the verified direct link to the arXiv abstract page. This is the original source.
Challenge or correct this reading
Send a correction or an opposing source with this reading’s URL. Disagreement and uncertainty can remain unresolved.
Further training of an existing model to adapt it to a particular task or use.
Definition referenceA prompt written to trick an AI system into ignoring its safety rules.
Definition referencearXiv is a research manuscript repository where authors share papers that may not yet have been peer reviewed.
Explore arXivarXiv is a research manuscript repository where authors share papers that may not yet have been peer reviewed.
Explore arXivFurther training of an existing model to adapt it to a particular task or use.
Definition referenceA prompt written to trick an AI system into ignoring its safety rules.
Definition referencearXiv is a research manuscript repository where authors share papers that may not yet have been peer reviewed.
Explore arXivarXiv is a research manuscript repository where authors share papers that may not yet have been peer reviewed.
Explore arXiv