IF-Guide: Influence Function-Guided Detoxification of LLMs
Zachary Coalson, Juhan Bae, Nicholas Carlini, Sanghyun Hong
Abstract
We study how training data contributes to the emergence of toxic behaviors in large language models. Most prior work on reducing model toxicity adopts reactive approaches, such as fine-tuning pre-trained (and potentially toxic) models to align them with human values. In contrast, we propose a proactive approach, IF-GUIDE, that leverages influence functions to identify and suppress harmful tokens in the training data. To this end, we first show that standard influence functions are ineffective at discovering harmful training records. We then present a novel adaptation that measures token-level attributions from training data to model toxicity, along with techniques for selecting toxic training documents and a learning objective that can be integrated into both pre-training and fine-tuning. Moreover, IF-GUIDE does not rely on human-preference data, which is typically required by existing alignment methods. In our evaluation, we demonstrate that IF-GUIDE substantially reduces both explicit and implicit toxicity-by up to 10 compared to uncensored models, and up to 3 compared to baseline alignment methods such as DPO and RAD-across both pre-training and fine-tuning scenarios. IF-GUIDE is computationally efficient: a billion-parameter model is not necessary for computing influence scores; a million-parameter model-with 7.5 fewer parameters-can effectively serve as a proxy for identifying harmful data. Our code is publicly available at: https://github.com/ztcoalson/IF-Guide
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 fdcdebfc-ce2c-48cd-9226-ef5c3de6732eCited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on38
- 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
- Pythia: A Suite for Analyzing Large Language Models Across Training and ScalingStella Biderman, Hailey Schoelkopf, Quentin Gregory Anthony, Herbie Bradley et al.ICML 2023 · 1,822 citations
- Plug and Play Language Models: A Simple Approach to Controlled Text GenerationSumanth Dathathri, Andrea Madotto, Janice Lan, Jane Hung et al.ICLR 2020 · 1,166 citations
- Refusal in Language Models Is Mediated by a Single DirectionAndy Arditi, Oscar Obeso, Aaquib Syed, Daniel Paleka et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 1,166 citations
Related papers
- A Mechanistic Understanding of Alignment Algorithms: A Case Study on DPO and ToxicityAndrew Lee, Xiaoyan Bai, Itamar Pres, Martin Wattenberg et al.ICML 2024 · 177 citations
- Correcting Large Language Model Behavior via Influence FunctionHan Zhang, Zhuo Zhang, Yi Zhang, Yuanzhao Zhai et al.AAAI 2025
- Safety Fine-Tuning at (Almost) No Cost: A Baseline for Vision Large Language ModelsYongshuo Zong, Ondrej Bohdal, Tingyang Yu, Yongxin Yang et al.ICML 2024 · 140 citations
- Model Editing as a Robust and Denoised variant of DPO: A Case Study on ToxicityRheeya Uppaal, Apratim Dey, Yiting He, Yiqiao Zhong et al.ICLR 2025
- Antidote: Post-fine-tuning Safety Alignment for Large Language Models against Harmful Fine-tuning AttackTiansheng Huang, Gautam Bhattacharya, Pratik Joshi, Joshua Kimball et al.ICML 2025
