Keeping LLMs Aligned After Fine-tuning: The Crucial Role of Prompt Templates
Kaifeng Lyu, Haoyu Zhao, Xinran Gu, Dingli Yu, Anirudh Goyal, Sanjeev Arora
Abstract
Public LLMs such as the Llama 2-Chat underwent alignment training and were considered safe. Recently Qi et al. [2024] reported that even benign fine-tuning on seemingly safe datasets can give rise to unsafe behaviors in the models. The current paper is about methods and best practices to mitigate such loss of alignment. We focus on the setting where a public model is fine-tuned before serving users for specific usage, where the model should improve on the downstream task while maintaining alignment. Through extensive experiments on several chat models (Meta's Llama 2-Chat, Mistral AI's Mistral 7B Instruct v0.2, and OpenAI's GPT-3.5 Turbo), this paper uncovers that the prompt templates used during fine-tuning and inference play a crucial role in preserving safety alignment, and proposes the ``Pure Tuning, Safe Testing'' (PTST) strategy -- fine-tune models without a safety prompt, but include it at test time. This seemingly counterintuitive strategy incorporates an intended distribution shift to encourage alignment preservation. Fine-tuning experiments on GSM8K, ChatDoctor, and OpenOrca show that PTST significantly reduces the rise of unsafe behaviors.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Cited by top-tier papers42
- Lisa: Lazy Safety Alignment for Large Language Models against Harmful Fine-tuning AttackTiansheng Huang, Sihao Hu, Fatih Ilhan, Selim F. Tekin et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 113 citations
- Decoding-Time Language Model Alignment with Multiple ObjectivesRuizhe Shi, Yifang Chen, Yushi Hu, Alisa Liu et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 111 citations
- Representation Noising: A Defence Mechanism Against Harmful FinetuningDomenic Rosati, Jan Wehner, Kai Williams, Lukasz Bartoszcze et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 107 citations
- AgentAuditor: Human-level Safety and Security Evaluation for LLM AgentsHanjun Luo, Shenyu Dai, Chiming Ni, Xinfeng Li et al.NeurIPS 2025 · 98 citations
- Your Agent May Misevolve: Emergent Risks in Self-evolving LLM AgentsShuai Shao, Qihan Ren, Dongrui Liu, Chen Qian et al.ICLR 2026 · 60 citations
Builds on16
- Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackLong Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 24,707 citations
- BERTScore: Evaluating Text Generation with BERTTianyi Zhang, Varsha Kishore, Felix Wu, Kilian Q. Weinberger et al.ICLR 2020 · 8,443 citations
- Fine-tuning Aligned Language Models Compromises Safety, Even When Users Do Not Intend To!Xiangyu Qi, Yi Zeng, Tinghao Xie, Pin-Yu Chen et al.ICLR 2024 · 1,104 citations
- The Flan Collection: Designing Data and Methods for Effective Instruction TuningShayne Longpre, Le Hou, Tu Vu, Albert Webson et al.ICML 2023 · 908 citations
- Tree of Attacks: Jailbreaking Black-Box LLMs AutomaticallyAnay Mehrotra, Manolis Zampetakis, Paul Kassianik, Blaine Nelson et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 835 citations
Related papers
- Do as I do (Safely): Mitigating Task-Specific Fine-tuning Risks in Large Language ModelsFrancisco Eiras, Aleksandar Petrov, Philip Torr, M. Pawan Kumar et al.ICLR 2025
- Emulated Disalignment: Safety Alignment for Large Language Models May Backfire!Zhanhui Zhou, Jie Liu, Zhichen Dong, Jiaheng Liu et al.ACL 2024
- Safety-Tuned LLaMAs: Lessons From Improving the Safety of Large Language Models that Follow InstructionsFederico Bianchi, Mirac Suzgun, Giuseppe Attanasio, Paul Röttger et al.ICLR 2024 · 373 citations
- Few Tokens, Big Leverage: Preserving Safety Alignment by Constraining Safety Tokens during Fine-tuningGuoli Wang, Haonan Shi, Tu Ouyang, An WangKDD 2026 · 5 citations
- SAFT: Safety-Preserving Adaptation via Fine-Tuning Transfer for Large Language ModelsZhiwen Ruan, Yan Yang, Zhuocheng Liang, Yun Chen et al.KDD 2026
