@inproceedings{ratnakar-vats-2026-geometry,
title = "The Geometry of Refusal: Linear Instability in Safety-Aligned {LLM}s",
author = "Ratnakar, Shivam and
Vats, Kartikeya",
editor = "Chang, Kai-Wei and
Mehrabi, Ninareh and
Krishna, Satyapriya and
Das, Anubrata and
Dhamala, Jwala and
Cao, Yang Trista and
Kumarage, Tharindu and
Ramakrishna, Anil and
Christodoulopoulos, Christos and
Wan, Yixin and
Galystan, Aram and
Kumar, Anoop and
Gupta, Rahul",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on Trustworthy {NLP} ({T}rust{NLP} 2026)",
month = jul,
year = "2026",
address = "San Diego, California",
publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
url = "https://preview.aclanthology.org/ingest-acl-workshops/2026.trustnlp-main.51/",
pages = "653--662",
ISBN = "979-8-89176-418-7",
abstract = "Modern Large Language Models (LLMs) rely on extensive safety alignment, yet the mechanistic basis of refusal remains opaque. In this work, we investigate whether safety compliance is a deep semantic decision or a manipulable linear feature. We introduce Contrastive Logit Steering (CLS), a zero-optimization framework that isolates the ``refusal direction'' by contrasting hidden states derived from safe and unrestricted system prompts. Unlike representation engineering methods that intervene on internal activations, CLS operates directly on the output distribution, serving as a diagnostic probe for alignment fragility. When coupled with prefix injection to bypass initial refusal reflexes, this method induces a phase transition where guardrails collapse. Our experiments on 7 model families reveal that safety implementation is architecturally deterministic. While models like Llama-3.1 exhibit a ``Late Decision'' topology that is easily bypassed by CLS (reaching 95{\%} ASR in milliseconds), others like Qwen-2.5 demonstrate ``Early Divergence'' by integrating safety mid-computation. Direct comparison with established activation-level steering methods shows that CLS achieves substantially higher attack success rates on Llama 2 (73{\%} vs. 22.6{\%}) and Qwen 7B (91{\%} vs. 79.2{\%}), demonstrating that logit-level intervention exposes alignment vulnerabilities that hidden-state methods underestimate. Beyond attacks, we show that this linearity enables bidirectional control: inverting the steering vector ``hardens'' models against jailbreaks without retraining. Our findings suggest that current alignment techniques create a steerable ``safety axis'' that serves as both a critical vulnerability and a precise primitive for defense."
}Markdown (Informal)
[The Geometry of Refusal: Linear Instability in Safety-Aligned LLMs](https://preview.aclanthology.org/ingest-acl-workshops/2026.trustnlp-main.51/) (Ratnakar & Vats, TrustNLP 2026)
ACL