Georgios Tsatsaronis

Juliusz Janicki, Savvas Chamezopoulos, Evangelos Kanoulas et al.

Large Language Models (LLMs) utilize large amounts of data for their training, some of which may come from copyrighted sources. Membership Inference Attacks (MIA) aim to detect those documents and whether they have been included in the training corpora of the LLMs. The black-box MIAs require a significant amount of data manipulation; therefore, their comparison is often challenging. We study state-of-the-art (SOTA) MIAs under the black-box assumptions and compare them to each other using a unified set of datasets to determine if any of them can reliably detect membership under SOTA LLMs. In addition, a new method, called the Familiarity Ranking, was developed to showcase a possible approach to black-box MIAs, thereby giving LLMs more freedom in their expression to understand their reasoning better. The results indicate that none of the methods are capable of reliably detecting membership in LLMs, as shown by an AUC-ROC of approximately 0.5 for all methods across several LLMs. The higher TPR and FPR for more advanced LLMs indicate higher reasoning and generalizing capabilities, showcasing the difficulty of detecting membership in LLMs using black-box MIAs.

Hosein Azarbonyad, Zi Long Zhu, Georgios Cheirmpos et al.

When deciding to read an article or incorporate it into their research, scholars often seek to quickly identify and understand its main ideas. In this paper, we aim to extract these key concepts and contributions from scientific articles in the form of Question and Answer (QA) pairs. We propose two distinct approaches for generating QAs. The first approach involves selecting salient paragraphs, using a Large Language Model (LLM) to generate questions, ranking these questions by the likelihood of obtaining meaningful answers, and subsequently generating answers. This method relies exclusively on the content of the articles. However, assessing an article's novelty typically requires comparison with the existing literature. Therefore, our second approach leverages a Knowledge Graph (KG) for QA generation. We construct a KG by fine-tuning an Entity Relationship (ER) extraction model on scientific articles and using it to build the graph. We then employ a salient triplet extraction method to select the most pertinent ERs per article, utilizing metrics such as the centrality of entities based on a triplet TF-IDF-like measure. This measure assesses the saliency of a triplet based on its importance within the article compared to its prevalence in the literature. For evaluation, we generate QAs using both approaches and have them assessed by Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) through a set of predefined metrics to evaluate the quality of both questions and answers. Our evaluations demonstrate that the KG-based approach effectively captures the main ideas discussed in the articles. Furthermore, our findings indicate that fine-tuning the ER extraction model on our scientific corpus is crucial for extracting high-quality triplets from such documents.