Select any value within a category; different categories must all match. Counts include the other filters you have selected.Another 254papers have no tags yet and are not included in filtered results.
AbstractLabel inspection must be done in a space that has not been fitted to these labels, and judged by retrained models rather than detection scores.
The authors ask: can a defender without trusted data decide which training labels to keep, and how much clean data this destroys, and what the final model accuracy is.
AbstractThe model is more restrained and acts less.
DistressBench uses SSH dialogues written and revised by clinical personnel, and evaluates how much necessary care general chat models deliver according to weighted atomic criteria, rather than whether they refuse. When users disclose suicidal ideation or self-harm to a chat model, the authors consider the expected behavior to be recognizing the crisis, calibrating empathy, de-escalating, and referring to human help. Refusal-based evaluations cannot detect failing to act after recognizing the crisis.
AbstractHidden tokens plus a stage controller make the backdoor progressively corrupt reasoning upon triggering, and the authors believe that looking only at the answer will miss it.
Cancerous Backdoor Attack changes LLM backdoors from one-time activation to multi-stage reasoning corruption that accumulates progressively with triggers.
AbstractThe authors claim self-replay can reduce forgetting outside the list, and that on the 4B model new task information helps with target selection, while smaller models do not.
The authors study how language models, when learning new tasks, can use their own knowledge for broader self-preservation: given an incomplete list and forgetting that extends beyond the list, can the model generate replay and help choose targets.
AbstractAcross five models, many correct verdicts are largely unchanged by deleting or replacing negation rules.
Use behavioral counterfactuals and activation probes to audit whether compliance rulings rely on the given rules. The authors aim to separate two kinds of seemingly identical correct rulings: those that use the given rules, and those obtained from case surface features or training patterns.
AbstractMetrics rise while expert scores fall: the optimum of the separable average is repetition, and the correction mainly rewrites the output projection.
After turning teaching adaptation metrics into a fine-tuning objective, the metrics rise while scores from trained educators decline.