Skip to content
← Back to explorer

Mitigating Over-Refusal in Aligned Large Language Models via Inference-Time Activation Energy

Eric Hanchen Jiang, Weixuan Ou, Run Liu, Shengyuan Pang, Guancheng Wan, Ranjie Duan, Wei Dong, Kai-Wei Chang, XiaoFeng Wang, Ying Nian Wu, Xinfeng Li · Oct 9, 2025 · Citations: 0

Abstract

Safety alignment of large language models currently faces a central challenge: existing alignment techniques often prioritize mitigating responses to harmful prompts at the expense of overcautious behavior, leading models to incorrectly refuse benign requests. A key goal of safe alignment is therefore to improve safety while simultaneously minimizing false refusals. In this work, we introduce Energy Landscape Steering (ELS), a novel, fine-tuning free framework designed to resolve this challenge through dynamic, inference-time intervention. We train a lightweight external Energy-Based Model (EBM) to assign high energy to undesirable states (false refusal or jailbreak) and low energy to desirable states (helpful response or safe reject). During inference, the EBM maps the LLM's internal activations to an energy landscape, and we use the gradient of the energy function to steer the hidden states toward low-energy regions in real time. This dynamically guides the model toward desirable behavior without modifying its parameters. By decoupling behavioral control from the model's core knowledge, ELS provides a flexible and computationally efficient solution. Extensive experiments across diverse models demonstrate its effectiveness, raising compliance on the ORB-H benchmark from 57.3 percent to 82.6 percent while maintaining baseline safety performance. Our work establishes a promising paradigm for building LLMs that simultaneously achieve high safety and low false refusal rates.

HFEPX Relevance Assessment

This paper has direct human-feedback and/or evaluation protocol signal and is likely useful for eval pipeline design.

Eval-Fit Score

40/100 • Low

Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.

Human Feedback Signal

Detected

Evaluation Signal

Weak / implicit signal

HFEPX Fit

High-confidence candidate

Human Data Lens

  • Uses human feedback: Yes
  • Feedback types: Red Team
  • Rater population: Unknown
  • Unit of annotation: Unknown
  • Expertise required: General
  • Extraction source: Persisted extraction

Evaluation Lens

  • Evaluation modes:
  • Agentic eval: None
  • Quality controls: Not reported
  • Confidence: 0.45
  • Flags: ambiguous

Protocol And Measurement Signals

Benchmarks / Datasets

No benchmark or dataset names were extracted from the available abstract.

Reported Metrics

No metric terms were extracted from the available abstract.

Research Brief

Deterministic synthesis

Safety alignment of large language models currently faces a central challenge: existing alignment techniques often prioritize mitigating responses to harmful prompts at the expense of overcautious behavior, leading models to incorrectly… HFEPX signals include Red Team with confidence 0.45. Updated from current HFEPX corpus.

Generated Mar 4, 2026, 5:52 AM · Grounded in abstract + metadata only

Key Takeaways

  • Safety alignment of large language models currently faces a central challenge: existing alignment techniques often prioritize mitigating responses to harmful prompts at the…
  • A key goal of safe alignment is therefore to improve safety while simultaneously minimizing false refusals.

Researcher Actions

  • Compare its human-feedback setup against pairwise and rubric hubs.
  • Identify benchmark choices from full text before operationalizing conclusions.
  • Verify metric definitions before comparing against your eval pipeline.

Caveats

  • Generated from title, abstract, and extracted metadata only; full-paper implementation details are not parsed.
  • Extraction confidence is probabilistic and should be validated for critical decisions.

Research Summary

Contribution Summary

  • Safety alignment of large language models currently faces a central challenge: existing alignment techniques often prioritize mitigating responses to harmful prompts at the expense of overcautious behavior, leading models to incorrectly…
  • A key goal of safe alignment is therefore to improve safety while simultaneously minimizing false refusals.
  • In this work, we introduce Energy Landscape Steering (ELS), a novel, fine-tuning free framework designed to resolve this challenge through dynamic, inference-time intervention.

Why It Matters For Eval

  • Safety alignment of large language models currently faces a central challenge: existing alignment techniques often prioritize mitigating responses to harmful prompts at the expense of overcautious behavior, leading models to incorrectly…
  • A key goal of safe alignment is therefore to improve safety while simultaneously minimizing false refusals.

Researcher Checklist

  • Pass: Human feedback protocol is explicit

    Detected: Red Team

  • Gap: Evaluation mode is explicit

    No clear evaluation mode extracted.

  • Gap: Quality control reporting appears

    No calibration/adjudication/IAA control explicitly detected.

  • Gap: Benchmark or dataset anchors are present

    No benchmark/dataset anchor extracted from abstract.

  • Gap: Metric reporting is present

    No metric terms extracted.

Related Papers

Papers are ranked by protocol overlap, extraction signal alignment, and semantic proximity.

Need human evaluators for your AI research? Scale annotation with expert AI Trainers.