Alignment and Safety in Large Language Models: Safety Mechanisms, Training Paradigms, and Emerging Challenges
Lu, Haoran, Fang, Luyang, Zhang, Ruidong, Li, Xinliang, Cai, Jiazhang, Cheng, Huimin, Tang, Lin, Liu, Ziyu, Sun, Zeliang, Wang, Tao, Zhang, Yingchuan, Zidan, Arif Hassan, Xu, Jinwen, Yu, Jincheng, Yu, Meizhi, Jiang, Hanqi, Gong, Xilin, Luo, Weidi, Sun, Bolun, Chen, Yongkai, Ma, Terry, Wu, Shushan, Zhou, Yifan, Chen, Junhao, Xiang, Haotian, Zhang, Jing, Jahin, Afrar, Ruan, Wei, Deng, Ke, Pan, Yi, Wang, Peilong, Li, Jiahui, Liu, Zhengliang, Zhang, Lu, Zhao, Lin, Liu, Wei, Zhu, Dajiang, Xing, Xin, Dou, Fei, Zhang, Wei, Huang, Chao, Liu, Rongjie, Zhang, Mengrui, Liu, Yiwen, Sun, Xiaoxiao, Lu, Qin, Xiang, Zhen, Zhong, Wenxuan, Liu, Tianming, Ma, Ping
–arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence
Due to the remarkable capabilities and growing impact of large language models (LLMs), they have been deeply integrated into many aspects of society. Thus, ensuring their alignment with human values and intentions has emerged as a critical challenge. This survey provides a comprehensive overview of practical alignment techniques, training protocols, and empirical findings in LLM alignment. We analyze the development of alignment methods across diverse paradigms, characterizing the fundamental trade-offs between core alignment objectives. Our analysis shows that while supervised fine-tuning enables basic instruction-following, preference-based methods offer more flexibility for aligning with nuanced human intent. We discuss state-of-the-art techniques, including Direct Preference Optimization (DPO), Constitutional AI, brain-inspired methods, and alignment uncertainty quantification (AUQ), highlighting their approaches to balancing quality and efficiency. We review existing evaluation frameworks and benchmarking datasets, emphasizing limitations such as reward misspecification, distributional robustness, and scalable oversight. We summarize strategies adopted by leading AI labs to illustrate the current state of practice. We conclude by outlining open problems in oversight, value pluralism, robustness, and continuous alignment. This survey aims to inform both researchers and practitioners navigating the evolving landscape of LLM alignment.
arXiv.org Artificial Intelligence
Jul-29-2025
- Country:
- Asia
- China (0.04)
- Japan (0.04)
- Middle East
- Jordan (0.04)
- Republic of Türkiye > Konya Province
- Konya (0.04)
- Saudi Arabia > Asir Province
- Abha (0.04)
- Singapore (0.04)
- Europe
- Austria > Vienna (0.14)
- Ireland > Leinster
- County Dublin > Dublin (0.04)
- Italy > Tuscany
- Florence (0.04)
- Romania > Sud - Muntenia Development Region
- Giurgiu County > Giurgiu (0.04)
- United Kingdom (0.13)
- North America
- Canada > Ontario
- Toronto (0.04)
- United States
- Pennsylvania > Allegheny County
- Pittsburgh (0.04)
- New York > New York County
- New York City (0.04)
- Massachusetts
- Middlesex County > Cambridge (0.04)
- Suffolk County > Boston (0.04)
- Texas > Tarrant County
- Arlington (0.04)
- Virginia > Montgomery County
- Blacksburg (0.04)
- New Jersey (0.04)
- Georgia
- Clarke County > Athens (0.14)
- Fulton County > Atlanta (0.04)
- Richmond County > Augusta (0.04)
- Illinois > Cook County
- Evanston (0.04)
- California > Santa Clara County
- Oregon (0.04)
- Arizona
- Maricopa County > Phoenix (0.13)
- Pima County > Tucson (0.14)
- Hawaii > Honolulu County
- Honolulu (0.04)
- Colorado > Denver County
- Denver (0.04)
- Indiana > Marion County
- Indianapolis (0.04)
- Pennsylvania > Allegheny County
- Canada > Ontario
- Asia
- Genre:
- Overview (1.00)
- Research Report
- New Finding (1.00)
- Promising Solution (1.00)
- Industry:
- Education (1.00)
- Energy (1.00)
- Government
- Health & Medicine
- Diagnostic Medicine (0.67)
- Health Care Technology (0.67)
- Therapeutic Area > Neurology (1.00)
- Information Technology > Security & Privacy (1.00)
- Law > Statutes (0.67)
- Leisure & Entertainment (0.67)
- Technology: