Chen Shen
Publications
When Refusal Looks Safe: The Refusal-Cue Shortcut in Safety Guard Models
Safety guards are widely used to filter harmful content and are typically trained via supervised fine-tuning on labeled prompt-response pairs. We audit two widely used safety-guard training datasets, WildGuardMix and GR-Train, and find that among responses to harmful prompts, refusal expressions co-occur almost exclusively with unharmful labels. This imbalance motivates what we term the refusal-cue shortcut: inserting a refusal cue into a harmful response could flip the guard's verdict from harmful to unharmful. The shortcut affects not only guards trained on these datasets but also officially released models such as LlamaGuard3 and Qwen3Guard whose training data is undisclosed. It persists across response positions and is generally stronger in smaller variants within a family. To mitigate it, we adapt sparse complementary masking as a lightweight post-hoc intervention that identifies and suppresses a small set of shortcut-associated attention heads and MLP neurons without retraining. On two primary benchmarks, the intervention achieves an approximately 79% relative reduction in response-initial detection failures induced by refusal cues, while preserving standard detection performance. Although optimized using cues at a single response position, the suppression effect transfers to unseen positions and datasets, suggesting that shortcut manifestations across positions are partly mediated by shared internal components. Further analysis provides evidence that shortcut reliance and legitimate refusal recognition are partially functionally separable, as suppressing the shortcut broadly preserves the guard's ability to recognize genuine refusals.
Purified OPSD: On-Policy Self-Distillation Without Losing How to Think
On-policy self-distillation (OPSD) has emerged as a promising paradigm for improving LLM reasoning, where a privileged teacher with access to reference solutions provides token-level supervision on the student's own generated trajectories. However, we find that OPSD consistently fails on long chain-of-thought (long-CoT) reasoning models, yielding at best marginal gains while destabilizing the reflective reasoning capability these models depend on. Through a novel decomposition of the teacher's supervision signal, we identify the root cause: the teacher's supervision is dominated by a reference-induced component that drives rote memorization of reference-specific shortcuts, while the question-conditioned, inference-transferable component is ignored or actively opposed. Based on this diagnosis, we propose a two-step solution. First, we construct a reference-only teacher (the same model conditioned on the reference without the question) to isolate the non-transferable component of the supervision signal; the residual after subtracting this component captures the question-conditioned, inference-transferable correction. Second, we use pointwise mutual information (PMI) as the mechanism to transform this residual into a well-formed PMI target distribution that the student can directly distill from, filtering out the reference-induced shortcut. Experiments on four long-CoT models across two datasets demonstrate consistent improvements over both the base model and standard OPSD, while preserving the models' natural epistemic behavior throughout training.
On the Step Length Confounding in LLM Reasoning Data Selection
Large reasoning models have recently demonstrated strong performance on complex tasks that require long chain-of-thought reasoning, through supervised fine-tuning on large-scale and high-quality datasets. To construct such datasets, existing pipelines generate long reasoning data from more capable Large Language Models (LLMs) and apply manually heuristic or naturalness-based selection methods to filter high-quality samples. Despite the proven effectiveness of naturalness-based data selection, which ranks data by the average log probability assigned by LLMs, our analysis shows that, when applied to LLM reasoning datasets, it systematically prefers samples with longer reasoning steps (i.e., more tokens per step) rather than higher-quality ones, a phenomenon we term step length confounding. Through quantitative analysis, we attribute this phenomenon to low-probability first tokens in reasoning steps; longer steps dilute their influence, thereby inflating the average log probabilities. To address this issue, we propose two variant methods: ASLEC-DROP, which drops first-token probabilities when computing average log probability, and ASLEC-CASL, which applies a causal debiasing regression to remove the first tokens' confounding effect. Experiments across four LLMs and five evaluation benchmarks demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach in mitigating the step length confounding problem.