Hongcan Deng | Search arXiv

arXiv2026

LaVGuard: Selective Decoding for Contextual Value Drift

A content-safe response can still promote priorities that conflict with its task: an assistant may demand compliance when asked to preserve autonomy. We study contextual value drift as a task-relative decoding problem with an explicit allowance for change. LaVGuard separates an authorized ten-dimensional profile from a frozen estimate of the values expressed in the visible prefix. A profile-relative density gate selects when to evaluate candidate continuations; their signed progress determines a logit tilt constrained by both changed-position and cumulative-KL budgets. We establish local surrogate improvement, pathwise budget feasibility, and a bound on response-distribution change. Profile conditioning raises boundary TPR at 5% FPR from .58 to .72. At the same .12 mean intervention ratio, the selection study reports risk-safety scores of .88 for LaVGuard and .72 for position-matched edits. The resulting interface makes task priorities actionable while keeping the extent of intervention explicit and bounded.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Values as Style: Disentangling Values from Semantics with One-Way Mixing for Low-Damage LLM Steering

Value steering should change an LLM's normative priorities while preserving the scenario, facts, and task constraints underlying its answer. Conventional activation edits often change both. We introduce an editable semantic-value interface on frozen residual states, with a one-way semantic-to-value pathway that grounds value recognition in context. Stop-gradient blocks feedback through this pathway; swap consistency, topic de-confounding, and decorrelation encourage selective codes. At inference, editing the value code produces a residual delta while holding the semantic code fixed. On two instruction-tuned backbones, this interface improves semantic preservation and reduces benign refusals at comparable value alignment. A matched mixing-by-gating ablation separates representation learning from selective edit activation, and dimension-matched probes establish improved code selectivity. Against validation-selected prompting on LLaMA-3.1-8B, the method achieves comparable alignment (0.750 vs. 0.748), higher BERTScore (0.938 vs. 0.923), and fewer contradictions (5.1% vs. 7.6%). Human ratings and cross-taxonomy controls provide complementary evidence for low-damage value steering.

cs.AI↗