mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

TrojFSP: Trojan Insertion in Few-shot Prompt Tuning

arXiv 2312.10467 ↗First posted 16 Dec 2023cs.LGcited by 9

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Prompt tuning is one of the most effective solutions to adapting a fixed pre-trained language model (PLM) for various downstream tasks, especially with only a few input samples. However, the security issues, e.g., Trojan attacks, of prompt tuning on a few data samples are not well-studied. Transferring established data poisoning attacks directly to few-shot prompt tuning presents multiple challenges. One significant issue is the textitpoisoned imbalance issue, where non-target class samples are added to the target class, resulting in a greater number of target-class samples compared to non-target class. While this issue is not critical in regular tuning, it significantly hampers the few-shot prompt tuning, making it difficult to simultaneously achieve a high attack success rate (ASR) and maintain clean data accuracy (CDA). Additionally, few-shot prompting is prone to overfitting in terms of both ASR and CDA. In this paper, we introduce textitTrojFSP, a method designed to address the challenges. To solve the poisoned imbalance issue, we develop a textitTarget-Class Shrink (TC-Shrink) technique, which aims to equalize the number of poisoning samples. To combat overfitting, we employ a textitSelective Token Poisoning technique to boost attack performance. Furthermore, we introduce a textitTrojan-Trigger Attention objective function to amplify the attention of the poisoned trojan prompt on triggers. Experiments show that our TrojFSP achieves an ASR of over 99% while maintaining negligible decreases in CDA across various PLMs and datasets.

Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 22 of its 32 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Dec 2023.

Builds on

22 of 32 references.

References · 22

  1. 2019Exploring the Limits of Transfer Learning with a Unified Text-to-Text Transformercited by 14,491
  2. 2019RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approachcited by 13,266
  3. 2021The Power of Scale for Parameter-Efficient Prompt Tuningcited by 3,769
  4. 2017BadNets: Identifying Vulnerabilities in the Machine Learning Model Supply Chaincited by 1,052
  5. 2019How Can We Know What Language Models Know?cited by 953
  6. 2023DecodingTrust: A Comprehensive Assessment of Trustworthiness in GPT Modelscited by 505
  7. 2020BERTweet: A pre-trained language model for English Tweetscited by 346
  8. 2021Pre-Trained Models: Past, Present and Futurecited by 319
  9. 2018Large Scale Crowdsourcing and Characterization of Twitter Abusive Behaviorcited by 265
  10. 2020ONION: A Simple and Effective Defense Against Textual Backdoor Attackscited by 231
  11. 2021Hidden Killer: Invisible Textual Backdoor Attacks with Syntactic Triggercited by 203
  12. 2021Differentiable Prompt Makes Pre-trained Language Models Better Few-shot Learnerscited by 115
10 more
  1. 2021RAP: Robustness-Aware Perturbations for Defending against Backdoor Attacks on NLP Modelscited by 97
  2. 2021Template-free Prompt Tuning for Few-shot NERcited by 73
  3. 2022BadPrompt: Backdoor Attacks on Continuous Promptscited by 59
  4. 2023Detecting Backdoors in Pre-trained Encoderscited by 53
  5. 2023NOTABLE: Transferable Backdoor Attacks Against Prompt-based NLP Modelscited by 33
  6. 2023TrojText: Test-time Invisible Textual Trojan Insertioncited by 26
  7. 2023Backdoor Learning on Sequence to Sequence Modelscited by 19
  8. 2022PromptAttack: Prompt-based Attack for Language Models via Gradient Searchcited by 15
  9. 2022ESTAS: Effective and Stable Trojan Attacks in Self-supervised Encoders with One Target Unlabelled Samplecited by 9
  10. 2023PromptAttack: Probing Dialogue State Trackers with Adversarial Promptscited by 6

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 4; 2025: 4; 2026: 1.

9 papers.