Improving Safety Alignment via Balanced Direct Preference Optimization
arXiv AIArchived Mar 25, 2026✓ Full text saved
arXiv:2603.22829v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: With the rapid development and widespread application of Large Language Models (LLMs), their potential safety risks have attracted widespread attention. Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) has been adopted to enhance the safety performance of LLMs. As a simple and effective alternative to RLHF, Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) is widely used for safety alignment. However, safety alignment still suffers from severe overfitting, whi
Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary· Claude Sonnet
Computer Science > Artificial Intelligence
[Submitted on 24 Mar 2026]
Improving Safety Alignment via Balanced Direct Preference Optimization
Shiji Zhao, Mengyang Wang, Shukun Xiong, Fangzhou Chen, Qihui Zhu, Shouwei Ruan, Yisong Xiao, Ranjie Duan, Xun Chen, XingXing Wei
With the rapid development and widespread application of Large Language Models (LLMs), their potential safety risks have attracted widespread attention. Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) has been adopted to enhance the safety performance of LLMs. As a simple and effective alternative to RLHF, Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) is widely used for safety alignment. However, safety alignment still suffers from severe overfitting, which limits its actual performance. This paper revisits the overfitting phenomenon from the perspective of the model's comprehension of the training data. We find that the Imbalanced Preference Comprehension phenomenon exists between responses in preference pairs, which compromises the model's safety performance. To address this, we propose Balanced Direct Preference Optimization (B-DPO), which adaptively modulates optimization strength between preferred and dispreferred responses based on mutual information. A series of experimental results show that B-DPO can enhance the safety capability while maintaining the competitive general capabilities of LLMs on various mainstream benchmarks compared to state-of-the-art methods. \color{red}{Warning: This paper contains examples of harmful texts, and reader discretion is recommended.
Subjects: Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
Cite as: arXiv:2603.22829 [cs.AI]
(or arXiv:2603.22829v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2603.22829
Focus to learn more
Submission history
From: Mengyang Wang [view email]
[v1] Tue, 24 Mar 2026 06:04:09 UTC (2,419 KB)
Access Paper:
HTML (experimental)
view license
Current browse context:
cs.AI
< prev | next >
new | recent | 2026-03
Change to browse by:
cs
References & Citations
NASA ADS
Google Scholar
Semantic Scholar
Export BibTeX Citation
Bookmark
Bibliographic Tools
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Bibliographic Explorer Toggle
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers Toggle
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps Toggle
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite.ai Toggle
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data, Media
Demos
Related Papers
About arXivLabs
Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)