Yule Liu

Zhen Sun, Zongmin Zhang, Xinyue Shen et al.

Social media platforms are experiencing a growing presence of AI-Generated Texts (AIGTs). However, the misuse of AIGTs could have profound implications for public opinion, such as spreading misinformation and manipulating narratives. Despite its importance, it remains unclear how prevalent AIGTs are on social media. To address this gap, this paper aims to quantify and monitor the AIGTs on online social media platforms. We first collect a dataset (SM-D) with around 2.4M posts from 3 major social media platforms: Medium, Quora, and Reddit. Then, we construct a diverse dataset (AIGTBench) to train and evaluate AIGT detectors. AIGTBench combines popular open-source datasets and our AIGT datasets generated from social media texts by 12 LLMs, serving as a benchmark for evaluating mainstream detectors. With this setup, we identify the best-performing detector (OSM-Det). We then apply OSM-Det to SM-D to track AIGTs across social media platforms from January 2022 to October 2024, using the AI Attribution Rate (AAR) as the metric. Specifically, Medium and Quora exhibit marked increases in AAR, rising from 1.77% to 37.03% and 2.06% to 38.95%, respectively. In contrast, Reddit shows slower growth, with AAR increasing from 1.31% to 2.45% over the same period. Our further analysis indicates that AIGTs on social media differ from human-written texts across several dimensions, including linguistic patterns, topic distributions, engagement levels, and the follower distribution of authors. We envision our analysis and findings on AIGTs in social media can shed light on future research in this domain.

Yule Liu, Zhiyuan Zhong, Yifan Liao et al.

The rising popularity of large language models (LLMs) has raised concerns about machine-generated text (MGT), particularly in academic settings, where issues like plagiarism and misinformation are prevalent. As a result, developing a highly generalizable and adaptable MGT detection system has become an urgent priority. Given that LLMs are most commonly misused in academic writing, this work investigates the generalization and adaptation capabilities of MGT detectors in three key aspects specific to academic writing: First, we construct MGT-Acedemic, a large-scale dataset comprising over 336M tokens and 749K samples. MGT-Acedemic focuses on academic writing, featuring human-written texts (HWTs) and MGTs across STEM, Humanities, and Social Sciences, paired with an extensible code framework for efficient benchmarking. Second, we benchmark the performance of various detectors for binary classification and attribution tasks in both in-domain and cross-domain settings. This benchmark reveals the often-overlooked challenges of attribution tasks. Third, we introduce a novel attribution task where models have to adapt to new classes over time without (or with very limited) access to prior training data in both few-shot and many-shot scenarios. We implement eight different adapting techniques to improve the performance and highlight the inherent complexity of the task. Our findings provide insights into the generalization and adaptation ability of MGT detectors across diverse scenarios and lay the foundation for building robust, adaptive detection systems. The code framework is available at https://github.com/Y-L-LIU/MGTBench-2.0.

Hongyi Cen, Mingxin Wang, Yule Liu et al.

Adversarial claim rewriting is widely used to test fact-checking systems, but standard metrics fail to capture truth-conditional consistency and often label semantically corrupted rewrites as successful. We introduce AtomEval, a validity-aware evaluation framework that decomposes claims into subject-relation-object-modifier (SROM) atoms and scores adversarial rewrites with Atomic Validity Scoring (AVS), enabling detection of factual corruption beyond surface similarity. Experiments on the FEVER dataset across representative attack strategies and LLM generators show that AtomEval provides more reliable evaluation signals in our experiments. Using AtomEval, we further analyze LLM-based adversarial generators and observe that stronger models do not necessarily produce more effective adversarial claims under validity-aware evaluation, highlighting previously overlooked limitations in current adversarial evaluation practices.

Yang Li, Yule Liu, Xinlei He et al.

Large Language Models (LLMs) have become core cognitive components in modern artificial intelligence (AI) systems, combining internal knowledge with external context to perform complex tasks. However, LLMs typically treat all accessible data indiscriminately, lacking inherent awareness of knowledge ownership and access boundaries. This deficiency heightens risks of sensitive data leakage and adversarial manipulation, potentially enabling unauthorized system access and severe security crises. Existing protection strategies rely on rigid, uniform defense that prevent dynamic authorization. Structural isolation methods faces scalability bottlenecks, while prompt guidance methods struggle with fine-grained permissions distinctions. Here, we propose the Chain-of-Authorization (CoA) framework, a secure training and reasoning paradigm that internalizes authorization logic into LLMs' core capabilities. Unlike passive external defneses, CoA restructures the model's information flow: it embeds permission context at input and requires generating explicit authorization reasoning trajectory that includes resource review, identity resolution, and decision-making stages before final response. Through supervised fine-tuning on data covering various authorization status, CoA integrates policy execution with task responses, making authorization a causal prerequisite for substantive responses. Extensive evaluations show that CoA not only maintains comparable utility in authorized scenarios but also overcomes the cognitive confusion when permissions mismatches. It exhibits high rejection rates against various unauthorized and adversarial access. This mechanism leverages LLMs' reasoning capability to perform dynamic authorization, using natural language understanding as a proactive security mechanism for deploying reliable LLMs in modern AI systems.

Zeren Luo, Zifan Peng, Yule Liu et al.

Recent advancements in Large Language Models (LLMs) have significantly enhanced the capabilities of AI-Powered Search Engines (AIPSEs), offering precise and efficient responses by integrating external databases with pre-existing knowledge. However, we observe that these AIPSEs raise risks such as quoting malicious content or citing malicious websites, leading to harmful or unverified information dissemination. In this study, we conduct the first safety risk quantification on seven production AIPSEs by systematically defining the threat model, risk type, and evaluating responses to various query types. With data collected from PhishTank, ThreatBook, and LevelBlue, our findings reveal that AIPSEs frequently generate harmful content that contains malicious URLs even with benign queries (e.g., with benign keywords). We also observe that directly querying a URL will increase the number of main risk-inclusive responses, while querying with natural language will slightly mitigate such risk. Compared to traditional search engines, AIPSEs outperform in both utility and safety. We further perform two case studies on online document spoofing and phishing to show the ease of deceiving AIPSEs in the real-world setting. To mitigate these risks, we develop an agent-based defense with a GPT-4.1-based content refinement tool and a URL detector. Our evaluation shows that our defense can effectively reduce the risk, with only a minor cost of reducing available information by approximately 10.7%. Our research highlights the urgent need for robust safety measures in AIPSEs.

Jingyi Zheng, Zifan Peng, Yule Liu et al.

Smart contracts are trustworthy, immutable, and automatically executed programs on the blockchain. Their execution requires the Gas mechanism to ensure efficiency and fairness. However, due to non-optimal coding practices, many contracts contain Gas waste patterns that need to be optimized. Existing solutions mostly rely on manual discovery, which is inefficient, costly to maintain, and difficult to scale. Recent research uses large language models (LLMs) to explore new Gas waste patterns. However, it struggles to remain compatible with existing patterns, often produces redundant patterns, and requires manual validation/rewriting. To address this gap, we present GasAgent, the first multi-agent system for smart contract Gas optimization that combines compatibility with existing patterns and automated discovery/validation of new patterns, enabling end-to-end optimization. GasAgent consists of four specialized agents, Seeker, Innovator, Executor, and Manager, that collaborate in a closed loop to identify, validate, and apply Gas-saving improvements. Experiments on 100 verified real-world contracts demonstrate that GasAgent successfully optimizes 82 contracts, achieving an average deployment Gas savings of 9.97%. In addition, our evaluation confirms its compatibility with existing tools and validates the effectiveness of each module through ablation studies. To assess broader usability, we further evaluate 500 contracts generated by five representative LLMs across 10 categories and find that GasAgent optimizes 79.8% of them, with deployment Gas savings ranging from 4.79% to 13.93%, showing its usability as the optimization layer for LLM-assisted smart contract development.

Wenhan Dong, Tianyi Hu, Jingyi Zheng et al.

Multi-round incomplete information tasks are crucial for evaluating the lateral thinking capabilities of large language models (LLMs). Currently, research primarily relies on multiple benchmarks and automated evaluation metrics to assess these abilities. However, our study reveals novel insights into the limitations of existing methods, as they often yield misleading results that fail to uncover key issues, such as shortcut-taking behaviors, rigid patterns, and premature task termination. These issues obscure the true reasoning capabilities of LLMs and undermine the reliability of evaluations. To address these limitations, we propose a refined set of evaluation standards, including inspection of reasoning paths, diversified assessment metrics, and comparative analyses with human performance.

Jingyi Zheng, Junfeng Wang, Zhen Sun et al.

As Large Language Models (LLMs) advance, Machine-Generated Texts (MGTs) have become increasingly fluent, high-quality, and informative. Existing wide-range MGT detectors are designed to identify MGTs to prevent the spread of plagiarism and misinformation. However, adversaries attempt to humanize MGTs to evade detection (named evading attacks), which requires only minor modifications to bypass MGT detectors. Unfortunately, existing attacks generally lack a unified and comprehensive evaluation framework, as they are assessed using different experimental settings, model architectures, and datasets. To fill this gap, we introduce the Text-Humanization Benchmark (TH-Bench), the first comprehensive benchmark to evaluate evading attacks against MGT detectors. TH-Bench evaluates attacks across three key dimensions: evading effectiveness, text quality, and computational overhead. Our extensive experiments evaluate 6 state-of-the-art attacks against 13 MGT detectors across 6 datasets, spanning 19 domains and generated by 11 widely used LLMs. Our findings reveal that no single evading attack excels across all three dimensions. Through in-depth analysis, we highlight the strengths and limitations of different attacks. More importantly, we identify a trade-off among three dimensions and propose two optimization insights. Through preliminary experiments, we validate their correctness and effectiveness, offering potential directions for future research.