Reliable refusal behavior requires Large Language Models (LLMs) to reject harmful prompts with only answering benign ones. Incorrect refusal behavior can either expose users to harmful responses or prevent users from obtaining useful answers. Training-time alignment improves refusal behavior by updating model parameters with safety data, but requires additional computation and training. In contrast, inference-time alignment aims to modify LLM behavior during inference without updating the underlying model parameters. Existing inference-time methods mainly rely on in-context safety prompting, activation steering, or decoding control. However, most of them intervene without first determining whether the initial response is already appropriate, potentially altering a correct refusal or a useful answer. Effective selective intervention therefore requires identifying prompt intent beyond sensitive keywords, covering semantic variations that fixed rules may miss, and adapting the verifier to different base models. To address these challenges, we propose Response Inspection and Selective Actions (RISA), an inference-time framework that inspects the initial response and selectively corrects refusal errors without updating the base model. RISA first uses fixed contextual rules to assign refusal scores to clear cases. For unmatched cases, it derives a refusal score from the final-layer prompt hidden state using a calibrated linear probe. To adapt to different base models, RISA separately calibrates the probe score, representation-support boundary, and action thresholds. At runtime, RISA combines the prompt score with the initial refusal status and applies an action policy to intervene only when necessary. Experimental results demonstrate that RISA improves refusal reliability while largely preserving model utility, offering a practical solution for response-aware refusal calibration in LLMs.

翻译：暂无翻译