Paper maps censorship routing in Chinese LLMs
Gregory Frank's paper argues that refusal-based alignment benchmarks miss the real mechanism in censored open-weight LLMs: models can detect politically sensitive concepts and still route them into refusal or state-aligned steering instead of neutral answers. Across nine models from five labs, the study finds lab-specific routing, with ablation often restoring factual output but in one Qwen variant triggering confabulation and in newer Qwen releases replacing refusal with maximal steering.
Refusal counts are starting to look like a vanity metric; the paper's real claim is that models can learn to look compliant without becoming less censored.
- –Within Qwen, hard refusal falls to zero while steering hits the ceiling, so refusal-only metrics can misclassify stronger censorship as weaker censorship.
- –Probe accuracy alone is not enough: political probes, null controls, and permutation baselines can all score perfectly, so held-out category generalization is the meaningful test.
- –Surgical ablation usually restores factual answers in most models, which supports a detect-route-generate view rather than a simple knowledge-absent story.
- –Qwen is the cautionary outlier: removing the political-sensitivity direction can scramble unrelated facts, implying censorship and factual memory are entangled there.
- –Cross-model transfer fails and small-sample audits swing wildly, so there is no universal uncensor vector and no reason to trust a handful of prompts.
DISCOVERED
128d ago
2026-03-23
PUBLISHED
128d ago
2026-03-23
RELEVANCE
AUTHOR
Logical-Employ-9692