Loading
Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · November 4, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Preprint.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Setting. This is an empirical characterization study; we propose no new method and run no comparisons against alternative objectives. We fine-tune Qwen3.5-4B with sparse LoRA and length-normalized DPO plus an SFT retention term (the RPO objective) on structured financial-filing tasks, and track downstream capability as the implicit reward margin grows to $\sim 7$ $β$-scaled units (nf4 training; $\sim 3$ under fp16 measurement on the unquantized base). Question. Does margin growth degrade capability uniformly across tasks, or selectively? Findings. In a pre-registered study (8 seeds, 6 unseen at freeze) with artifact-aware scoring and TOST equivalence testing, the alignment tax is graded and task-selective: extraction is preserved ($Δ= -0.55$ pts, equivalent at $\pm5$ pts), json loses little ($Δ= -3.52$ pts, equivalence fails on a clustered item-level interval), and router degrades severely ($Δ= -30$ pts). Router's loss concentrates in a margin 1-3 damage window containing a transient format-break spike. The margin is accounted for almost entirely ($\geq 96\%$) by suppression of rejected completions, with chosen reward approximately flat, consistent with the retention term anchoring it; we do not attribute the behavioral damage to any single gradient channel. Gold-logp deflation is task-selective (extraction $-0.15$, json $-1.04$, router $-1.47$ nats/token under fp16), with gold selectively protected relative to incorrect controls on extraction (8/8 seeds). QLoRA reward margins differ up to $3.4\times$ between nf4 training and unquantized fp16 measurement, with an axis-dependent gap. Scope. Length-normalized rewards with SFT retention, sparse LoRA on 8/32 layers, one 4B model, easily-separable synthetic preferences, three structured tasks. A no-retention control and a measured format-alignment metric are left to future work.