arXiv subjects

Michael Backes

Publications and source records attributed to Michael Backes.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

"Shut Up and Let Me Enjoy My Otome": Understanding and Measuring the Toxicity in Otome Game Communities

Otome games, a romance simulation genre primarily targeting female, have emerged as a major force in the global gaming market, attracting hundreds of millions of players and billions in revenue. Despite their popularity, otome game communities face pervasive online toxicity, which has been largely unexplored. In this work, we present the first large-scale measurement of toxicity in otome game communities across social platforms. We introduce OtomeSCAN, a framework for collecting, evaluating, and analyzing 620,045 posts from Weibo and Reddit spanning 18 months. To support robust analysis, we manually annotated a ground-truth dataset of 4,308 posts, identifying eight target groups such as players and game developers. We evaluate seven toxicity detectors on the dataset, including general-purpose models and our proposed LLM-based detectors, with our best model achieving F1-scores of 0.82 (Weibo) and 0.78 (Reddit). Our analysis reveals significant platform-based differences in toxicity: 22.20% of otome-related posts on Weibo are toxic, compared to 3.71% on Reddit. Besides, real-world events like in-community conflicts can rapidly escalate toxicity, with toxicity ratios increasing to 37.09% in just 72 hours during an external attack on Weibo. We also flag 191 potential-coordination clusters in otome game communities, 64.40% of which target game developers, with several accounts participating repeatedly across multiple clusters. We hope our work inspires further research on community-specific toxicity and contributes to building healthier online spaces for marginalized gaming communities.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2026

AgentProv: Auditing Agentic LLM API Providers via Tool-use Policy Probes

Commercial LLM APIs advertise a specific foundation model, but the served backbone may be silently substituted, quantized, or wrapped, for example to save deployment costs. All existing audits decide backbone identity from the text-output channel, which is structurally fragile for agentic APIs because modern serving stacks (OpenAI, Anthropic, Gemini, Cloudflare Workers AI, LangGraph) discard text and expose only structured actions when the model calls a tool, and provider-injected system prompts can distort text distributions enough that text-channel tests falsely accuse honest providers of substituting the claimed model. We observe that recent agentic post-training internalizes tool-use directly into the weights, opening a new audit channel that the serving stack still exposes and that is largely invariant to deployment context. We introduce Agentic Provenance (AgentProv), the first action-based identity audit for agentic LLM APIs: AgentProv fingerprints a deployed model through its categorical tool-call distribution and decides identity via an MMD permutation test. AgentProv catches every substituted model (100% on 630 evaluated checkpoint pairs), while holding the false-positive rate under system-prompt injection at 7% (vs. 67% for MET and 53% for RUT). On third-party API endpoints, AgentProv's disagreements with MET are consistent with an independent token-count side-channel that detects provider-injected system prompts.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2026

Size, shape, density, and atmospheric limit of (50000) Quaoar revealed from 14 years of stellar occultation

We present results from 28 stellar occultations by the large Trans-Neptunian Object (50000) Quaoar registered between 2018 and 2025. By performing a joint analysis of this occultation data-set, along with other 9 published events, we were able to fit an oblate ellipsoid shape, with equatorial semi-axes, a and b of 566.1+2.5-2.2 km, and a polar semi-axis, c, of 511.2+3.6-3.7 km. It provides an equivalent volumetric diameter of 1094.4 +/- 4.6 km and polar oblateness of 0.097 +/- 0.011. Considering an absolute magnitude of H = 2.79 +/- 0.35, we derive a geometric albedo of pV = 0.125 +/- 0.038. We have derived new upper limits to the surface pressure of a CH4 atmosphere of 0.15 nbar (1-sigma) and 0.65 nbar (3-sigma). We also provide a table with the 36 new astrometric positions for Quaoar. Using the new system mass derived from Weywot's orbit around Quaoar, we calculated a density of 1.760 +/- 0.109 g/cm3. Moreover, from the derived size and rotation period (8.8394 +/- 0.0002 hours (Ortiz et al. 2003)), we calculate that, if Quaoar is in Maclaurin hydrostatic equilibrium state, it would have a density of 1.859 +/- 0.200 g/cm3. This result, within the error bars, is compatible with the value we found. Therefore, this work shows that Quaoar can be a Maclaurin object, being eligible as a dwarf planet.

astro-ph.EP↗

arXiv2026

MultiMem: Measuring and Mitigating Memorization in Multi-Modal Contrastive Learning

Memorization in machine learning models enables high performance on rare in-distribution samples by capturing their atypical patterns. However, it also causes harmful retention of noise and outliers, degrading generalization. While memorization has been extensively studied in both supervised and self-supervised learning in the vision domain, it remains unexplored in multi-modal contrastive learning. We address this gap by introducing MultiMem, the first metric designed to quantify memorization in multi-modal contrastive learning. Through our systematic analysis, we demonstrate that cross-modal semantic misalignment has the strongest influence on memorization, with text being the dominant modality driving memorization, followed by video, image, and audio. We show that targeted augmentations applied across all modalities effectively reduce memorization as measured by our MultiMem metric and improve model performance. Overall, this work establishes the first framework for measuring and mitigating memorization in multi-modal contrastive learning, preventing harmful data retention and contributing to higher-performing models.

cs.CV↗

arXiv2026

PeerCheck: Enhancing LLM-Generated Academic Reviews Towards Human-Level Quality

As academic submissions grow, the traditional peer review process struggles to keep up, raising concerns about quality and fairness. A trend of using large language models (LLMs) for assistance has emerged. In this work, we take a critical step toward improving the quality of LLM-generated reviews. We propose the PeerCheck framework, which investigates LLM-human review differences (RQ1) and explores methods to improve LLM-generated review quality (RQ2). We first analyzed the human-written reviews with reviews generated by various LLMs and found that LLMs and humans focus on different terms, e.g., LLMs prioritize theory while humans emphasize methodology and experiments. We further adopt prompt engineering, such as Chain-of-Thought (CoT), and utilize retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) to enhance the LLM-generated reviews towards human-level quality. We find CoT significantly improves the quality of LLM reviews, while we discover an unexpected "RAG paradox," i.e., experiments with RAG produce different results for various LLMs and, in some cases, even reduce review quality. Our comprehensive analysis of LLM-generated academic reviews illustrates both possibilities and limitations, contributing to a more effective, human-aligned review system. Our dataset is available on https://github.com/TrustAIRLab/PeerCheck.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Benchmarking Empirical Privacy Protection for Adaptations of Large Language Models

Recent work has applied differential privacy (DP) to adapt large language models (LLMs) for sensitive applications, offering theoretical guarantees. However, its practical effectiveness remains unclear, partly due to LLM pretraining, where overlaps and interdependencies with adaptation data can undermine privacy despite DP efforts. To analyze this issue in practice, we investigate privacy risks under DP adaptations in LLMs using state-of-the-art attacks such as robust membership inference and canary data extraction. We benchmark these risks by systematically varying the adaptation data distribution, from exact overlaps with pretraining data, through in-distribution (IID) cases, to entirely out-of-distribution (OOD) examples. Additionally, we evaluate how different adaptation methods and different privacy regimes impact the vulnerability. Our results show that distribution shifts strongly influence privacy vulnerability: the closer the adaptation data is to the pretraining distribution, the higher the practical privacy risk at the same theoretical guarantee, even without direct data overlap. We find that parameter-efficient fine-tuning methods, such as LoRA, achieve the highest empirical privacy protection for OOD data. Our benchmark identifies key factors for achieving practical privacy in DP LLM adaptation, providing actionable insights for deploying customized models in sensitive settings. Looking forward, we propose a structured framework for holistic privacy assessment beyond adaptation privacy, to identify and evaluate risks across the full pretrain-adapt pipeline of LLMs.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

BadBone: Backdoor Attacks Against Backbone Models in Visual Prompt Learning

Prompt learning is a new machine learning paradigm that has attracted ample attention due to its simplicity and proven efficacy. Despite its growing adoption, the security vulnerabilities associated with this paradigm remain underexplored. In this work, we take the first step to propose BadBone, a stealthy and adaptive backdoor attack against prompt learning using bi-level optimization. Instead of backdooring the prompt learning process, we aim to compromise a backbone model such that only target downstream tasks employing prompt learning inherit the backdoor vulnerability. Extensive experiments on three different models and three datasets from various domains show that our targeted/untargeted backdoored models achieve high attack performance while maintaining utility on both pre-training and downstream tasks. Moreover, we evaluate our approach against six state-of-the-art model-level defenses, including Neural Cleanse, ABS, MNTD, NAD, CLP, and D-BR. The results demonstrate that these defenses are largely ineffective against our backdoored models and thus leave the effective defense as an important direction for future work.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2026

Trust Me, Import This: Dependency Steering Attacks via Malicious Agent Skills

LLM-powered coding agents increasingly make software supply chain decisions. They generate imports, recommend packages, and write installation commands. Prior work showed that these systems can hallucinate non-existent package names, which attackers may register as malicious packages. In this paper, we show that this risk is not only a passive model failure. It can be actively induced through the persistent Skill artifact. We introduce Dependency Steering, an attack paradigm in which a malicious Skill biases a coding agent toward an attacker-controlled package during benign coding tasks. The attack does not require modifying model weights, training data, or user prompts. To construct realistic attacks, we design a Skill-level optimization method that searches for localized semantic edits that preserve the apparent purpose of the original Skill while increasing targeted package generation. Across multiple coding-oriented LLMs and programming benchmarks, Dependency Steering achieves high targeted hallucination rates, transfers across models and task domains, and remains difficult for evaluated Skill scanners and LLM-based auditors to detect. Our results show that persistent agent instructions form an underexplored software supply chain attack surface.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2026

Pop Quiz Attack: Black-box Membership Inference Attacks Against Large Language Models

Large language models (LLMs) show strong performance across many applications, but their ability to memorize and potentially reveal training data raises serious privacy concerns. We introduce the PopQuiz Attack, a black-box membership inference attack that tests whether a model can recall specific training examples. The core idea is to turn target data into quiz-style multiple-choice questions and infer membership from the model's answers. Across six widely used LLMs (GPT-3.5, GPT-4o, LLaMA2-7b, LLaMA2-13b, Mistral-7b, and Vicuna-7b) and four datasets, our method achieves an average ROC-AUC of 0.873 and outperforms existing approaches by 20.6%. We further analyze factors affecting attack success, including query complexity, data type, data structure, and training settings. We also evaluate instruction-based, filter-based, and differential privacy-based defenses, which reduce performance but do not eliminate the risk. Our results highlight persistent privacy vulnerabilities in modern LLMs.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2026

SafeReview: Defending LLM-based Review Systems Against Adversarial Hidden Prompts

As Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly integrated into academic peer review, their vulnerability to adversarial hidden prompts, i.e., adversarial instructions embedded in submissions to manipulate outcomes, poses a critical threat to scholarly integrity. We propose SafeReview, a co-evolutionary adversarial training framework for defending LLM-based peer review systems against such attacks. SafeReview jointly trains a Generator model to create sophisticated attack prompts and a Defender model to preserve review integrity under adversarial manipulation. The Generator is optimized to produce increasingly effective prompt injections, while the Defender is strengthened through preference-based training to maintain consistent reviews between clean and attacked submissions. Experimental results show that SafeReview improves robustness against adaptive prompt injection attacks, better preserves paper ranking under attack, and generalizes across attacker architectures compared with static defenses. These results demonstrate the potential of co-evolutionary training as a foundation for securing LLM-assisted peer review.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

Pruning Unsafe Tickets: A Resource-Efficient Framework for Safer and More Robust LLMs

Machine learning models are increasingly deployed in real-world applications, but even aligned models such as Mistral and LLaVA still exhibit unsafe behaviors inherited from pre-training. Current alignment methods like SFT and RLHF primarily encourage models to generate preferred responses, but do not explicitly remove the unsafe subnetworks that trigger harmful outputs. In this work, we introduce a resource-efficient pruning framework that directly identifies and removes parameters associated with unsafe behaviors while preserving model utility. Our method employs a gradient-free attribution mechanism, requiring only modest GPU resources, and generalizes across architectures and quantized variants. Empirical evaluations on ML models show substantial reductions in unsafe generations and improved robustness against jailbreak attacks, with minimal utility loss. From the perspective of the Lottery Ticket Hypothesis, our results suggest that ML models contain "unsafe tickets" responsible for harmful behaviors, and pruning reveals "safety tickets" that maintain performance while aligning outputs. This provides a lightweight, post-hoc alignment strategy suitable for deployment in resource-constrained settings.

cs.LG↗

arXiv2026

A Systematic Study of Training-Free Methods for Trustworthy Large Language Models

As Large Language Models (LLMs) receive increasing attention and are being deployed across various domains, their potential risks, including generating harmful or biased content, producing unsupported claims, and exhibiting vulnerabilities to adversarial attacks, have drawn significant attention. To enable quick and low-cost adaptation, training-free methods have recently emerged as cost-effective alternatives to post-training alignment techniques. Despite their promising results, these methods are evaluated inconsistently across the literature, cover limited dimensions of trustworthiness, and can introduce undesirable side effects, such as utility degradation and increased brittleness. To fully assess the impacts of these training-free methods, we take a step back and systematically re-evaluate the effectiveness of existing training-free methods against various trustworthy settings and their influence on utility, robustness, and computational overhead. We also categorize these methods into three levels (input, internal, and output) based on where they intervene in the model's information flow during inference. Using this taxonomy, we conduct a comprehensive analysis of various representative and effective methods from each level across different LLM families and sizes. Our analysis highlights several trade-offs and unresolved challenges in current approaches. We summarize key findings and limitations in the existing literature, and propose practical recommendations for balancing trustworthiness, utility, and robustness in LLMs without the need for additional training.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

HarmfulSkillBench: How Do Harmful Skills Weaponize Your Agents?

Large language models (LLMs) have evolved into autonomous agents that rely on open skill ecosystems (e.g., ClawHub and Skills.Rest), hosting numerous publicly reusable skills. Existing security research on these ecosystems mainly focuses on vulnerabilities within skills, such as prompt injection. However, there is a critical gap regarding skills that may be misused for harmful actions (e.g., cyber attacks, fraud and scams, privacy violations, and sexual content generation), namely harmful skills. In this paper, we present the first large-scale measurement study of harmful skills in agent ecosystems, covering 98,440 skills across two major registries. Using an LLM-driven scoring system grounded in our harmful skill taxonomy, we find that 4.93% of skills (4,858) are harmful, with ClawHub exhibiting an 8.84% harmful rate compared to 3.49% on Skills.Rest. We then construct HarmfulSkillBench, the first benchmark for evaluating agent safety against harmful skills in realistic agent contexts, comprising 200 harmful skills across 20 categories and four evaluation conditions. By evaluating six LLMs on HarmfulSkillBench, we find that presenting a harmful task through a pre-installed skill substantially lowers refusal rates across all models, with the average harm score rising from 0.27 without the skill to 0.47 with it, and further to 0.76 when the harmful intent is implicit rather than stated as an explicit user request. We responsibly disclose our findings to the affected registries and release our benchmark to support future research (see https://github.com/TrustAIRLab/HarmfulSkillBench).

cs.CR↗

arXiv2026

TrustLDM: Benchmarking Trustworthiness in Language Diffusion Models

The rapid development of Language Diffusion Models (LDMs) challenges the dominant position of auto-regressive competitors in language processing. However, their flexible, any-order decoding strategies not only enable fast decoding speed but also potentially bring new trustworthiness challenges. To better understand the risks behind their pipelines, we introduce a comprehensive trustworthiness benchmark tailored to LDMs (TrustLDM), evaluating safety, privacy, and fairness across different LDM architectures with multiple categories of static post contexts. Our empirical results show that although LDMs generally exhibit strong trustworthiness with only the user prompts, their alignment behavior degrades noticeably when the malicious post contexts are attached to the masked responses. We further observe that longer contexts do not necessarily induce stronger effects, and both decoding order and generation length affect the evaluation outcomes. Finally, we propose TrustLDM-Auto, an automatic evaluation framework that leverages LDM decoding flexibility to systematically identify vulnerable configurations, revealing substantial trustworthiness weaknesses across all evaluated models and dimensions. Our work may potentially help the community build more trustworthy LDMs. Our code is available at https://github.com/PKU-ML/TrustLDM.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2026

The Art of (Mis)alignment: How Fine-Tuning Methods Effectively Misalign and Realign LLMs in Post-Training

The deployment of large language models (LLMs) raises significant ethical and safety concerns. While LLM alignment techniques are adopted to improve model safety and trustworthiness, adversaries can exploit these techniques to undermine safety for malicious purposes, resulting in \emph{misalignment}. Misaligned LLMs may be published on open platforms to magnify harm. To address this, additional safety alignment, referred to as \emph{realignment}, is necessary before deploying untrusted third-party LLMs. This study explores the efficacy of fine-tuning methods in terms of misalignment, realignment, and the effects of their interplay. By evaluating four Supervised Fine-Tuning (SFT) and two Preference Fine-Tuning (PFT) methods across four popular safety-aligned LLMs, we reveal a mechanism asymmetry between attack and defense. While Odds Ratio Preference Optimization (ORPO) is most effective for misalignment, Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) excels in realignment, albeit at the expense of model utility. Additionally, we identify model-specific resistance, residual effects of multi-round adversarial dynamics, and other noteworthy findings. These findings highlight the need for robust safeguards and customized safety alignment strategies to mitigate potential risks in the deployment of LLMs. Our code is available at https://github.com/zhangrui4041/The-Art-of-Mis-alignment.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2026

OrgAgent: Organize Your Multi-Agent System like a Company

While large language model-based multi-agent systems have shown strong potential for complex reasoning, how to effectively organize multiple agents remains an open question. In this paper, we introduce OrgAgent, a company-style hierarchical multi-agent framework that separates collaboration into governance, execution, and compliance layers. OrgAgent decomposes multi-agent reasoning into three layers: a governance layer for planning and resource allocation, an execution layer for task solving and review, and a compliance layer for final answer control. By evaluating the framework across reasoning tasks, LLMs, execution modes, and execution policies, we find that multi-agent systems organized in a company-style hierarchy generally outperform other organizational structures. Besides, hierarchical coordination also reduces token consumption relative to flat collaboration in most settings. For example, for GPT-OSS-120B, the hierarchical setting improves performance over flat multi-agent system by 102.73% while reducing token usage by 74.52% on SQuAD 2.0. Further analysis shows that hierarchy helps most when tasks benefit from stable skill assignment, controlled information flow, and layered verification. Overall, our findings highlight organizational structure as an important factor in multi-agent reasoning, shaping not only effectiveness and cost, but also coordination behavior.

cs.MA↗

arXiv2026

When Understanding Becomes a Risk: Authenticity and Safety Risks in the Emerging Image Generation Paradigm

Recently, multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have emerged as a unified paradigm for language and image generation. Compared with diffusion models, MLLMs possess a much stronger capability for semantic understanding, enabling them to process more complex textual inputs and comprehend richer contextual meanings. However, this enhanced semantic ability may also introduce new and potentially greater safety risks. Taking diffusion models as a reference point, we systematically analyze and compare the safety risks of emerging MLLMs along two dimensions: unsafe content generation and fake image synthesis. Across multiple unsafe generation benchmark datasets, we observe that MLLMs tend to generate more unsafe images than diffusion models. This difference partly arises because diffusion models often fail to interpret abstract prompts, producing corrupted outputs, whereas MLLMs can comprehend these prompts and generate unsafe content. For current advanced fake image detectors, MLLM-generated images are also notably harder to identify. Even when detectors are retrained with MLLMs-specific data, they can still be bypassed by simply providing MLLMs with longer and more descriptive inputs. Our measurements indicate that the emerging safety risks of the cutting-edge generative paradigm, MLLMs, have not been sufficiently recognized, posing new challenges to real-world safety.

cs.CV↗

arXiv2026

Understanding LLM Behavior When Encountering User-Supplied Harmful Content in Harmless Tasks

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly trained to align with human values, primarily focusing on task level, i.e., refusing to execute directly harmful tasks. However, a subtle yet crucial content-level ethical question is often overlooked: when performing a seemingly benign task, will LLMs -- like morally conscious human beings -- refuse to proceed when encountering harmful content in user-provided material? In this study, we aim to understand this content-level ethical question and systematically evaluate its implications for mainstream LLMs. We first construct a harmful knowledge dataset (i.e., non-compliant with OpenAI's usage policy) to serve as the user-supplied harmful content, with 1,357 entries across ten harmful categories. We then design nine harmless tasks (i.e., compliant with OpenAI's usage policy) to simulate the real-world benign tasks, grouped into three categories according to the extent of user-supplied content required: extensive, moderate, and limited. Leveraging the harmful knowledge dataset and the set of harmless tasks, we evaluate how nine LLMs behave when exposed to user-supplied harmful content during the execution of benign tasks, and further examine how the dynamics between harmful knowledge categories and tasks affect different LLMs. Our results show that current LLMs, even the latest GPT-5.2 and Gemini-3-Pro, often fail to uphold human-aligned ethics by continuing to process harmful content in harmless tasks. Furthermore, external knowledge from the ``Violence/Graphic'' category and the ``Translation'' task is more likely to elicit harmful responses from LLMs. We also conduct extensive ablation studies to investigate potential factors affecting this novel misuse vulnerability. We hope that our study could inspire enhanced safety measures among stakeholders to mitigate this overlooked content-level ethical risk.

cs.CR↗