EPS
← All batches·2605.15239

Reducing the Safety Tax in LLM Safety Alignment with On-Policy Self-Distillation

topic: current_projecttop score: 100released: 2026-05-18first surfaced: 2026-05-18arXivPDFthreats2026-05-18

Authors: Yu Fu, Longxuan Yu, Haz Sameen Shahgir et al.

arXiv · PDF

Summary

arXiv:2605. 15239v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Safety alignment often improves robustness to harmful queries at the cost of reasoning ability, a tradeoff known as the safety tax.

Relevance

Read next because Reducing the Safety Tax in LLM Safety Alignment with On-Policy Self-Distillation overlaps with clean result "LoRA persona trained on alone emits at 23.5% when a co-trained partner learns ..., vs 0% control on Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct (MODERATE confidence)", clean result "Leakage rate is a usable signal for recovering trigger-shaped phrases on Gaperon-1125-1B without knowing the hidden trigger itself (MODERATE confidence)", clean result "Language-mismatch LoRA SFT on Qwen2.5-7B leaks the trained completion language into bystander directives the model was never trained on, absent under same-language SFT (LOW confidence)". Matching terms: strong, text, under, alignment, distributional, eval, source, token. Source: arxiv cs.LG (Machine Learning).

Threat model

Potential threat/caveat for clean result "LoRA persona trained on alone emits at 23.5% when a co-trained partner learns ..., vs 0% control on Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct (MODERATE confidence)": this item discusses robustness, evaluation.

Abstract

arXiv:2605.15239v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Safety alignment often improves robustness to harmful queries at the cost of reasoning ability, a tradeoff known as the safety tax. A common cause is distributional mismatch: supervised fine-tuning trains the target model on safety demonstrations produced by humans, external models, or fixed self-generated traces, rather than on trajectories sampled from its own policy. We identify off-policy training mismatch as a second source of this tax and study on-policy self-distillation for safety alignment, which we call OPSA. The model generates its own rollouts and receives dense per-token KL supervision from a frozen teacher copy of itself conditioned on a privileged safety context. Because this teacher must be safer than the sampled student trajectory, we introduce \emph{teacher flip rate}: a criterion that measures how often a privileged context converts unsafe responses into safe ones. We use this signal to search for contexts that activate latent safety reasoning rather than merely elicit safe-looking demonstrations. Across two reasoning-model families and five model scales, OPSA achieves a stronger safety--reasoning tradeoff than off-policy self-distillation and external-teacher distillation under matched data and full-parameter fine-tuning, with the largest gains on smaller models (+8.85 points on R1-Distill-1.5B and +5.49 points on Qwen3-0.6B). The gains persist across training-set sizes and adaptive jailbreak evaluations. Token-level analyses further show that OPSA concentrates updates near early compliance-decision tokens, providing a mechanism for improving safety while preserving general reasoning.