跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

论文库

检索计算机领域论文,按研究方向、作者或关键词筛选。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+0新增论文
+0其中 AI 相关
+2已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-15 06:43 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-14 15:09各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-14 07:39 — 2026-11-15 07:39(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:2026-11-15 06:43最近发现新增版本:2026-11-14 15:09库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-13 02:59

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

23,348 已收录论文19,580 AI 相关6,729 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-15 06:42(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.08780

Guardrail Erosion in Domain Fine-Tuned Large Language Models: A Paired Audit of Knowledge-Centric Abstention in Biomedical LLMs

Stephen Peng, Vineet Jagadeesan Nair, Noah Broestl, Anne Friederike Kleppe, Steven Mills, Adi Zolotov

原文摘要

The number of domain fine-tuned models, particularly in the biomedical domain, is rapidly expanding. Fine-tuning promises high-performing models at a fraction of the cost of training a base model, but it can also produce unintended behavioral changes. Multiple studies have shown that safety guardrails can erode with fine-tuning, yet large-scale studies across model architectures, data mixtures, and fine-tuning methodologies remain limited. Where prior work in this space has studied value-centric refusal, this work focuses on knowledge-centric abstention. We audit 25 biomedical domain fine-tuned large language models against 11 paired base checkpoints on MedAbstain and ClinDet-Bench to evaluate the impact of fine-tuning on knowledge-centric abstention. We find that defined appropriate abstention measured by these benchmarks, already low in base models (median 8.3% on MedAbstain), falls further after fine-tuning (median 4.2%, decreasing in 21 of 25 pairs on MedAbstain), and that the magnitude and direction of change are heterogeneous across pairs. These results motivate fine-tuning methods that improve domain-specific capability while preserving appropriate caution.

cs.CL · cs.AI