Data valuation is a cornerstone of data-centric learning, where prior efforts primarily focus on designing algorithms to classify training samples as either beneficial or detrimental for the learning task. However, leveraging these valuation estimates for subsequent data intervention remains underexplored; conventional approaches typically discard or downweight harmful samples, thereby underutilizing available data resources. In this paper, we present Dynamic Influence-based Valuation and Editing (DIVE), a novel and efficient framework that dynamically estimates sample values at the batch level and transforms detrimental data into beneficial contributions. Rather than altering the raw data, DIVE operates at the optimization level by strategically reversing the gradient directions of harmful samples during training, ensuring seamless integration with standard learning procedures with minimal overhead. Extensive empirical evaluations demonstrate that DIVE consistently improves classification performance, maximizes data efficiency, stabilizes optimization, and effectively generalizes to large language model fine-tuning.
Finetuning a language model on documents that are explicitly annotated as fictional results in a model that still actually believes the documents' core claims, an effect known as Negation Neglect. In our evaluations, models trained on documents prefixed and suffixed with such annotations correctly identify the relevant claims as fictional only about 9% of the time. To address this, we introduce Goggles, a learned module that intervenes on the finetuning gradient rather than the data. During supervised finetuning, a Goggles module edits the gradients an LLM LoRA receives, imparting a chosen epistemic frame (the stance the model takes toward the nature of what it reads) to whatever the documents teach. A Goggles instance is trained once for a given base model, frame, and LoRA configuration, then applied frozen to documents it was never trained on. Trained through Goggles on those same documents, now carrying no fictional annotation, the model flags the content as fictional roughly 91% of the time, while preserving capability (GPQA and TruthfulQA match or exceed baseline). The same architecture supports other frames: a Goggles instance can be trained to treat documents as "part of an AI safety evaluation by Redwood Research" rather than simply as fiction. The imparted frame persists under continued finetuning that pushes back toward the claim, where prior interventions revert. Goggles suggests a path toward training language models on known-misaligned data without absorbing the behaviors that data demonstrates.