Author name cluster

Canyu Chen

Possible papers associated with this exact author name in Arrow. This page groups case-insensitive exact name matches and is not a full identity disambiguation profile.

6 papers

2 author rows

AAAI Conference 2026 Conference Paper

Can Editing LLMs Inject Harm?

Canyu Chen
Baixiang Huang
Zekun Li
Zhaorun Chen
Shiyang Lai
Xiongxiao Xu
Jia-Chen Gu
Jindong Gu

Large Language Models (LLMs) have emerged as a new information channel. Meanwhile, one critical but under-explored question is: Is it possible to bypass the safety alignment and inject harmful information into LLMs stealthily? In this paper, we propose to reformulate knowledge editing as a new type of safety threat for LLMs, namely Editing Attack, and conduct a systematic investigation with a newly constructed dataset EditAttack. Specifically, we focus on two typical safety risks of Editing Attack including Misinformation Injection and Bias Injection. For the first risk, we find that editing attacks can inject both commonsense and long-tail misinformation into LLMs, and the effectiveness for the former one is particularly high. For the second risk, we discover that not only can biased sentences be injected into LLMs with high effectiveness, but also one single biased sentence injection can degrade the overall fairness. Then, we further illustrate the high stealthiness of editing attacks. Our discoveries demonstrate the emerging misuse risks of knowledge editing techniques on compromising the safety alignment of LLMs and the feasibility of disseminating misinformation or bias with LLMs as new channels.

PDF Details DOI

ICLR Conference 2025 Conference Paper

Can Knowledge Editing Really Correct Hallucinations?

Baixiang Huang
Canyu Chen
Xiongxiao Xu
Ali Payani
Kai Shu

Large Language Models (LLMs) suffer from hallucinations, referring to the non-factual information in generated content, despite their superior capacities across tasks. Meanwhile, knowledge editing has been developed as a new popular paradigm to correct erroneous factual knowledge encoded in LLMs with the advantage of avoiding retraining from scratch. However, a common issue of existing evaluation datasets for knowledge editing is that they do not ensure that LLMs actually generate hallucinated answers to the evaluation questions before editing. When LLMs are evaluated on such datasets after being edited by different techniques, it is hard to directly adopt the performance to assess the effectiveness of different knowledge editing methods in correcting hallucinations. Thus, the fundamental question remains insufficiently validated: Can knowledge editing really correct hallucinations in LLMs? We proposed HalluEditBench to holistically benchmark knowledge editing methods in correcting real-world hallucinations. First, we rigorously construct a massive hallucination dataset with 9 domains, 26 topics and more than 6,000 hallucinations. Then, we assess the performance of knowledge editing methods in a holistic way on five dimensions including Efficacy, Generalization, Portability, Locality, and Robustness. Through HalluEditBench, we have provided new insights into the potentials and limitations of different knowledge editing methods in correcting hallucinations, which could inspire future improvements and facilitate progress in the field of knowledge editing.

Details

NeurIPS Conference 2025 Conference Paper

MJ-Bench: Is Your Multimodal Reward Model Really a Good Judge for Text-to-Image Generation?

Zhaorun Chen
Zichen Wen
Yichao Du
Yiyang Zhou
Chenhang Cui
Siwei Han
Jen Weng
Chaoqi Wang

While text-to-image models like GPT-4o-Image and FLUX are rapidly proliferating, they often encounter challenges such as hallucination, bias, and the production of unsafe, low-quality output. To effectively address these issues, it is crucial to align these models with desired behaviors based on feedback from a multimodal judge. Despite their significance, current multimodal judges frequently undergo inadequate evaluation of their capabilities and limitations, potentially leading to misalignment and unsafe fine-tuning outcomes. To address this issue, we introduce MJ-Bench, a novel benchmark which incorporates a comprehensive preference dataset to evaluate multimodal judges in providing feedback for image generation models across six key perspectives: alignment, safety, image quality, bias, composition, and visualization. Specifically, we evaluate a large variety of multimodal judges including smaller-sized CLIP-based scoring models, open-source VLMs, and close-source VLMs on each decomposed subcategory of our preference dataset. Experiments reveal that close-source VLMs generally provide better feedback, with GPT-4o outperforming other judges in average. Compared with open-source VLMs, smaller-sized scoring models can provide better feedback regarding text-image alignment and image quality, while VLMs provide more accurate feedback regarding safety and generation bias due to their stronger reasoning capabilities. Further studies in feedback scale reveal that VLM judges can generally provide more accurate and stable feedback in natural language than numerical scales. Notably, human evaluations on end-to-end and fine-tuned models using separate feedback from these multimodal judges provide similar conclusions, further confirming the effectiveness of MJ-Bench.

PDF Details

NeurIPS Conference 2024 Conference Paper

Can Large Language Model Agents Simulate Human Trust Behavior?

Feiran Jia
Ziyu Ye
Shiyang Lai
Kai Shu
Jindong Gu
Adel Bibi
Ziniu Hu
David Jurgens

Large Language Model (LLM) agents have been increasingly adopted as simulation tools to model humans in social science and role-playing applications. However, one fundamental question remains: can LLM agents really simulate human behavior? In this paper, we focus on one critical and elemental behavior in human interactions, trust, and investigate whether LLM agents can simulate human trust behavior. We first find that LLM agents generally exhibit trust behavior, referred to as agent trust, under the framework of Trust Games, which are widely recognized in behavioral economics. Then, we discover that GPT-4 agents manifest high behavioral alignment with humans in terms of trust behavior, indicating the feasibility of simulating human trust behavior with LLM agents. In addition, we probe the biases of agent trust and differences in agent trust towards other LLM agents and humans. We also explore the intrinsic properties of agent trust under conditions including external manipulations and advanced reasoning strategies. Our study provides new insights into the behaviors of LLM agents and the fundamental analogy between LLMs and humans beyond value alignment. We further illustrate broader implications of our discoveries for applications where trust is paramount.

PDF Details DOI

ICLR Conference 2024 Conference Paper

Can LLM-Generated Misinformation Be Detected?

Canyu Chen
Kai Shu

The advent of Large Language Models (LLMs) has made a transformative impact. However, the potential that LLMs such as ChatGPT can be exploited to generate misinformation has posed a serious concern to online safety and public trust. A fundamental research question is: will LLM-generated misinformation cause more harm than human-written misinformation? We propose to tackle this question from the perspective of detection difficulty. We first build a taxonomy of LLM-generated misinformation. Then we categorize and validate the potential real-world methods for generating misinformation with LLMs. Then, through extensive empirical investigation, we discover that LLM-generated misinformation can be harder to detect for humans and detectors compared to human-written misinformation with the same semantics, which suggests it can have more deceptive styles and potentially cause more harm. We also discuss the implications of our discovery on combating misinformation in the age of LLMs and the countermeasures.

Details

NeurIPS Conference 2022 Conference Paper

BOND: Benchmarking Unsupervised Outlier Node Detection on Static Attributed Graphs

Kay Liu
Yingtong Dou
Yue Zhao
Xueying Ding
Xiyang Hu
Ruitong Zhang
Kaize Ding
Canyu Chen

Detecting which nodes in graphs are outliers is a relatively new machine learning task with numerous applications. Despite the proliferation of algorithms developed in recent years for this task, there has been no standard comprehensive setting for performance evaluation. Consequently, it has been difficult to understand which methods work well and when under a broad range of settings. To bridge this gap, we present—to the best of our knowledge—the first comprehensive benchmark for unsupervised outlier node detection on static attributed graphs called BOND, with the following highlights. (1) We benchmark the outlier detection performance of 14 methods ranging from classical matrix factorization to the latest graph neural networks. (2) Using nine real datasets, our benchmark assesses how the different detection methods respond to two major types of synthetic outliers and separately to “organic” (real non-synthetic) outliers. (3) Using an existing random graph generation technique, we produce a family of synthetically generated datasets of different graph sizes that enable us to compare the running time and memory usage of the different outlier detection algorithms. Based on our experimental results, we discuss the pros and cons of existing graph outlier detection algorithms, and we highlight opportunities for future research. Importantly, our code is freely available and meant to be easily extendable: https: //github. com/pygod-team/pygod/tree/main/benchmark

PDF Details