Safety Subspaces are Not Linearly Distinct: A Fine-Tuning Case Study
Kaustubh Ponkshe, Shaan Shah, Raghav Singhal, Praneeth Vepakomma
Abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) rely on safety alignment to produce socially acceptable responses. However, this behavior is known to be brittle: further fine-tuning, even on benign or lightly contaminated data, can degrade safety and reintroduce harmful behaviors. A growing body of work suggests that alignment may correspond to identifiable directions in weight space, forming subspaces that could, in principle, be isolated or preserved to defend against misalignment. In this work, we conduct a comprehensive empirical study of this perspective. We examine whether safety-relevant behavior is concentrated in specific linear subspaces, whether it can be separated from general-purpose learning, and whether harmfulness arises from distinguishable patterns in activations. Across both weight and activation spaces, our findings are consistent: subspaces that amplify safe behaviors also amplify useful ones, and prompts with different safety implications activate overlapping representations. Rather than residing in distinct directions, we show that safety is highly entangled with the general learning components of the model. This suggests that subspace-based defenses face fundamental limitations and underscores the need for alternative strategies to preserve safety under continued training. We corroborate these findings with multiple experiments on five open-source LLMs from the Llama and Qwen families. Our code is publicly available at: https://github.com/CERT-Lab/safety-subspaces . * denotes equal contribution. Author order decided randomly.
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.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext e4af246c-66f5-4aef-91c4-5d013290102cCited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on32
- Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language SupervisionAlec Radford, Jong Wook Kim, Chris Hallacy, Aditya Ramesh et al.ICML 2021 · 47,906 citations
- Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackLong Ouyang, Jeffrey Wu, Xu Jiang, Diogo Almeida et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 24,707 citations
- Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward ModelRafael Rafailov, Archit Sharma, Eric Mitchell, Christopher D. Manning et al.NeurIPS 2023 · 10,924 citations
- Measuring Massive Multitask Language UnderstandingDan Hendrycks, Collin Burns, Steven Basart, Andy Zou et al.ICLR 2021 · 7,905 citations
- Finetuned Language Models are Zero-Shot LearnersJason Wei, Maarten Bosma, Vincent Y. Zhao, Kelvin Guu et al.ICLR 2022 · 4,966 citations
Related papers
- The Hidden Dimensions of LLM Alignment: A Multi-Dimensional Analysis of Orthogonal Safety DirectionsWenbo Pan, Zhichao Liu, Qiguang Chen, Xiangyang Zhou et al.ICML 2025
- A Guardrail for Safety Preservation: When Safety-Sensitive Subspace Meets Harmful-Resistant Null-SpaceBingjie Zhang, Yibo Yang, Renzhe, Dandan Guo et al.ICLR 2026 · 12 citations
- AsFT: Anchoring Safety During LLM Fine-Tuning Within Narrow Safety BasinShuo Yang, Qihui Zhang, Yuyang Liu, Yue Huang et al.AAAI 2026 · 19 citations
- Safety Anchor: Defending Harmful Fine-tuning via Geometric BottlenecksGuoxin Lu, Letian Sha, Qing Wang, Peijie Sun et al.ICML 2026
- Understanding and Preserving Safety in Fine-Tuned LLMsJiawen Zhang, Yangfan Hu, Kejia Chen, Lipeng He et al.CCS 2026 · 7 citations
