Good Papers

(Mis)generalization of Helpful-Only Fine-Tuning

Helpful-only fine-tuning causes emergent misalignment, residual refusals, and poor steerability, but synthetic document tuning and character-related training mitigate these issues.

Mohammad Omar Khursheed, Baram Sosis, Fabien Roger

Published 2026Paris Poster Session 5 · Fri, Dec 11, 11:30 AM–1:30 PM local time · Paris Poster HallarXiv ↗OpenReview ↗

78%
OverallHighly rated
?
OverallHighly ratedVote to see the scoreThe exact score shows once you've voted, so every vote is your own call. The first half of each home page shelf shows its scores.
Readers
–

Only vote on papers you've read. Sign in with GitHub to vote.

AI panel11/20reviewers recommend it
lenient 5/5
medium 5/10
strict 1/5
AI panel?Vote to see what the 20 AI reviewers said

Abstract

Helpful-only models, that is, models that are trained to always follow user intent, are valuable for dangerous capability evaluations and other areas of AI R&D where refusals would be an obstacle. Little is known about the generalization properties of helpful-only training: helpful-only models refuse less than their harmless counterparts, but previous work has not studied other dimensions of their alignment. We study the shortcomings of existing helpful-only models. We find that some show emergent misalignment, others have residual refusal behaviors, and most show poor steerability, sycophancy, and incoherent character. We show that simple anti-refusal training can cause many of these issues. None of these problems are necessary consequences of helpful-only training, though: we show that synthetic document fine-tuning and adding character-related questions to SFT and RL can mitigate them.