paper:doi-10-48550-arxiv-2502-17420The Geometry of Refusal in Large Language Models: Concept Cones and Representational Independence
Original abstract (expand)
The safety alignment of large language models (LLMs) can be circumvented through adversarially crafted inputs, yet the mechanisms by which these attacks bypass safety barriers remain poorly understood. Prior work suggests that a single refusal direction in the model's activation space determines whether an LLM refuses a request. In this study, we propose a novel gradient-based approach to representation engineering and use it to identify refusal directions. Contrary to prior work, we uncover multiple independent directions and even multi-dimensional concept cones that mediate refusal. Moreover, we show that orthogonality alone does not imply independence under intervention, motivating the notion of representational independence that accounts for both linear and non-linear effects. Using this framework, we identify mechanistically independent refusal directions. We show that refusal mechanisms in LLMs are governed by complex spatial structures and identify functionally independent directions, confirming that multiple distinct mechanisms drive refusal behavior. Our gradient-based approach uncovers these mechanisms and can further serve as a foundation for future work on understanding LLMs.
Similar preprints — Semantic Scholar
Cited by (2)
- Persona Non Grata: Single-Method Safety Evaluation Is Incomplete for Persona-Imbued LLMs
Prompt-only persona safety evaluation creates a systematic blind spot: across 5,568 judged conditions on Llama-3.1-8B, Gemma-3-27B, Qwen3.5-9B, and Qwen3.5-27B, prompt-side persona danger rankings are
- From Directions to Cones: Exploring Multidimensional Representations of Propositional Facts in LLMs
Propositional truth in LLMs is not encoded as a single linear direction but as a multi-dimensional subspace that can be characterized by concept cones—sets of all nonnegative linear combinations of or