arXiv (OAI Expanded)
open access
How Semantically Stable Are LLM Refusals? Measuring Confusion in Local Safety Boundaries
As safety alignment becomes standard in large language models, refusal behavior has become an important part of model reliability. However, models may still reject benign prompts, especially when the wording resembles risky content. Existing evaluations usually report global scores, such as false re
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Refuse without Refusal: A Structural Analysis of Safety-Tuning Responses for Reducing False Refusals in Language Models#971391
- Refuse without Refusal: A Structural Analysis of Safety-Tuning Responses for Reducing False Refusals in Language Models#965979
- Harnessing Textual Refusal Directions for Multimodal Safety#324892
- ReFrame: Evidence-Guided Test-Time Safety Alignment in Multimodal Large Language Models#662273
- ReFrame: Evidence-Guided Test-Time Safety Alignment in Multimodal Large Language Models#661223
Record · ID 1082997
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive