mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Guiding LLM to Fool Itself: Automatically Manipulating Machine Reading Comprehension Shortcut Triggers

arXiv 2310.18360 ↗First posted 24 Oct 2023cs.CL cs.AIcited by 10

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Recent applications of LLMs in Machine Reading Comprehension (MRC) systems have shown impressive results, but the use of shortcuts, mechanisms triggered by features spuriously correlated to the true label, has emerged as a potential threat to their reliability. We analyze the problem from two angles: LLMs as editors, guided to edit text to mislead LLMs; and LLMs as readers, who answer questions based on the edited text. We introduce a framework that guides an editor to add potential shortcuts-triggers to samples. Using GPT4 as the editor, we find it can successfully edit trigger shortcut in samples that fool LLMs. Analysing LLMs as readers, we observe that even capable LLMs can be deceived using shortcut knowledge. Strikingly, we discover that GPT4 can be deceived by its own edits (15% drop in F1). Our findings highlight inherent vulnerabilities of LLMs to shortcut manipulations. We publish ShortcutQA, a curated dataset generated by our framework for future research.

Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 26 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 24 Oct 2023.

Builds on

18 of 26 references.

References · 18

  1. 2022Training language models to follow instructions with human feedbackcited by 15,971
  2. 2016SQuAD: 100,000+ Questions for Machine Comprehension of Textcited by 4,148
  3. 2023Not what you've signed up for: Compromising Real-World LLM-Integrated Applications with Indirect Prompt Injectioncited by 1,443
  4. 2023Large Language Models Can Be Easily Distracted by Irrelevant Contextcited by 841
  5. 2017Adversarial Examples for Evaluating Reading Comprehension Systemscited by 571
  6. 2016NewsQA: A Machine Comprehension Datasetcited by 331
  7. 2023On the Robustness of ChatGPT: An Adversarial and Out-of-distribution Perspectivecited by 211
  8. 2022Why Should Adversarial Perturbations be Imperceptible? Rethink the Research Paradigm in Adversarial NLPcited by 102
  9. 2020Look at the First Sentence: Position Bias in Question Answeringcited by 84
  10. 2021Identifying and Mitigating Spurious Correlations for Improving Robustness in NLP Modelscited by 76
  11. 2023ChatGPT as an Attack Tool: Stealthy Textual Backdoor Attack via Blackbox Generative Model Triggercited by 31
  12. 2022TASA: Deceiving Question Answering Models by Twin Answer Sentences Attackcited by 15
6 more
  1. 2020Semantics Altering Modifications for Evaluating Comprehension in Machine Readingcited by 13
  2. 2022Lexical Generalization Improves with Larger Models and Longer Trainingcited by 9
  3. 2022Which Shortcut Solution Do Question Answering Models Prefer to Learn?cited by 9
  4. 2022Look to the Right: Mitigating Relative Position Bias in Extractive Question Answeringcited by 7
  5. 2023Think Twice: Measuring the Efficiency of Eliminating Prediction Shortcuts of Question Answering Modelscited by 6
  6. 2018Are you tough enough? Framework for Robustness Validation of Machine Comprehension Systemscited by 3

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 4; 2025: 4; 2026: 2.

10 papers.