CLMay 23, 2024Code
Representation Noising: A Defence Mechanism Against Harmful FinetuningDomenic Rosati, Jan Wehner, Kai Williams et al.
Releasing open-source large language models (LLMs) presents a dual-use risk since bad actors can easily fine-tune these models for harmful purposes. Even without the open release of weights, weight stealing and fine-tuning APIs make closed models vulnerable to harmful fine-tuning attacks (HFAs). While safety measures like preventing jailbreaks and improving safety guardrails are important, such measures can easily be reversed through fine-tuning. In this work, we propose Representation Noising (RepNoise), a defence mechanism that operates even when attackers have access to the weights. RepNoise works by removing information about harmful representations such that it is difficult to recover them during fine-tuning. Importantly, our defence is also able to generalize across different subsets of harm that have not been seen during the defence process as long as they are drawn from the same distribution of the attack set. Our method does not degrade the general capability of LLMs and retains the ability to train the model on harmless tasks. We provide empirical evidence that the efficacy of our defence lies in its ``depth'': the degree to which information about harmful representations is removed across all layers of the LLM. We also find areas where RepNoise still remains ineffective and highlight how those limitations can inform future research.
60.2CYMay 21
Detecting Offensive Cyber Agents: A Detection-in-Depth ApproachMatt Mittelsteadt, Jam Kraprayoon, Robin Staes-Polet et al.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) agents can now orchestrate cyberattacks. This development is already increasing the speed and scale of cyber attacks, decreasing attack costs, and improving the operational autonomy of cyber capabilities. To defend against these emerging threats, actors must first develop the capability to detect them. This report frames the offensive cyber agent detection challenge by outlining the coming detection gap between offensive cyber agents and traditional cyber capabilities; introducing detection-in-depth, a strategic framework to guide policymakers and defenders responding to this detection gap; and presents five actionable detection mechanisms to support policymakers, industry, and defenders when putting this strategic framework into practice. These include (1) Agent Identifiers for Critical Infrastructure,(2) Agent Honeypots; (3) AI-Automated Alert Analysis and Triage: systems that use AI to filter, prioritize, and interpret the growing volume of detection signals expected from autonomous cyber operations; (4) An Agentic Security Alert Standard: A reporting standard model that providers can use to communicate agentic threats, improving the speed, consistency, and actionability of reports; (5) An Agentic Cybersecurity Exchange (ACE): an institution modeled on the Global Signal Exchange that brings together model and cloud providers to detect offensive cyber agent threats at their origin point and coordinate ecosystem-wide agentic threat disruption.
CLFeb 26, 2024
Immunization against harmful fine-tuning attacksDomenic Rosati, Jan Wehner, Kai Williams et al.
Large Language Models (LLMs) are often trained with safety guards intended to prevent harmful text generation. However, such safety training can be removed by fine-tuning the LLM on harmful datasets. While this emerging threat (harmful fine-tuning attacks) has been characterized by previous work, there is little understanding of how we should proceed in constructing and validating defenses against these attacks especially in the case where defenders would not have control of the fine-tuning process. We introduce a formal framework based on the training budget of an attacker which we call "Immunization" conditions. Using a formal characterisation of the harmful fine-tuning problem, we provide a thorough description of what a successful defense must comprise of and establish a set of guidelines on how rigorous defense research that gives us confidence should proceed.
LGFeb 27, 2025
Taxonomy, Opportunities, and Challenges of Representation Engineering for Large Language ModelsJan Wehner, Sahar Abdelnabi, Daniel Tan et al.
Representation Engineering (RepE) is a novel paradigm for controlling the behavior of LLMs. Unlike traditional approaches that modify inputs or fine-tune the model, RepE directly manipulates the model's internal representations. As a result, it may offer more effective, interpretable, data-efficient, and flexible control over models' behavior. We present the first comprehensive survey of RepE for LLMs, reviewing the rapidly growing literature to address key questions: What RepE methods exist and how do they differ? For what concepts and problems has RepE been applied? What are the strengths and weaknesses of RepE compared to other methods? To answer these, we propose a unified framework describing RepE as a pipeline comprising representation identification, operationalization, and control. We posit that while RepE methods offer significant potential, challenges remain, including managing multiple concepts, ensuring reliability, and preserving models' performance. Towards improving RepE, we identify opportunities for experimental and methodological improvements and construct a guide for best practices.
LGOct 24, 2025
Probe-based Fine-tuning for Reducing ToxicityJan Wehner, Mario Fritz
Probes trained on model activations can detect undesirable behaviors like deception or biases that are difficult to identify from outputs alone. This makes them useful detectors to identify misbehavior. Furthermore, they are also valuable training signals, since they not only reward outputs, but also good internal processes for arriving at that output. However, training against interpretability tools raises a fundamental concern: when a monitor becomes a training target, it may cease to be reliable (Goodhart's Law). We propose two methods for training against probes based on Supervised Fine-tuning and Direct Preference Optimization. We conduct an initial exploration of these methods in a testbed for reducing toxicity and evaluate the amount by which probe accuracy drops when training against them. To retain the accuracy of probe-detectors after training, we attempt (1) to train against an ensemble of probes, (2) retain held-out probes that aren't used for training, and (3) retrain new probes after training. First, probe-based preference optimization unexpectedly preserves probe detectability better than classifier-based methods, suggesting the preference learning objective incentivizes maintaining rather than obfuscating relevant representations. Second, probe diversity provides minimal practical benefit - simply retraining probes after optimization recovers high detection accuracy. Our findings suggest probe-based training can be viable for certain alignment methods, though probe ensembles are largely unnecessary when retraining is feasible.
AIFeb 6, 2025
Safety is Essential for Responsible Open-Ended SystemsIvaxi Sheth, Jan Wehner, Sahar Abdelnabi et al.
AI advancements have been significantly driven by a combination of foundation models and curiosity-driven learning aimed at increasing capability and adaptability. A growing area of interest within this field is Open-Endedness - the ability of AI systems to continuously and autonomously generate novel and diverse artifacts or solutions. This has become relevant for accelerating scientific discovery and enabling continual adaptation in AI agents. This position paper argues that the inherently dynamic and self-propagating nature of Open-Ended AI introduces significant, underexplored risks, including challenges in maintaining alignment, predictability, and control. This paper systematically examines these challenges, proposes mitigation strategies, and calls for action for different stakeholders to support the safe, responsible and successful development of Open-Ended AI.
AIFeb 7, 2024
Explaining Learned Reward Functions with Counterfactual TrajectoriesJan Wehner, Frans Oliehoek, Luciano Cavalcante Siebert
Learning rewards from human behaviour or feedback is a promising approach to aligning AI systems with human values but fails to consistently extract correct reward functions. Interpretability tools could enable users to understand and evaluate possible flaws in learned reward functions. We propose Counterfactual Trajectory Explanations (CTEs) to interpret reward functions in reinforcement learning by contrasting an original with a counterfactual partial trajectory and the rewards they each receive. We derive six quality criteria for CTEs and propose a novel Monte-Carlo-based algorithm for generating CTEs that optimises these quality criteria. Finally, we measure how informative the generated explanations are to a proxy-human model by training it on CTEs. CTEs are demonstrably informative for the proxy-human model, increasing the similarity between its predictions and the reward function on unseen trajectories. Further, it learns to accurately judge differences in rewards between trajectories and generalises to out-of-distribution examples. Although CTEs do not lead to a perfect understanding of the reward, our method, and more generally the adaptation of XAI methods, are presented as a fruitful approach for interpreting learned reward functions.