Adversarial attack and defense technologies in natural language processing: A survey
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
LLMs generalize better than fine-tuned models in downstream tasks facing out-of-distribution data, such as adversarial examples and domain shifts.
“(1) LLMs generalize better than fine-tuned models in downstream tasks facing out-ofdistribution data, such as adversarial examples and domain shifts.Evidenced by the comparison-based empirical results in related literature like References [38,95,117], as well as the generalization improvement gained through alignment techniques like Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) [89].”
From Harnessing the power of llms in practice: a survey on chatGPT and beyond (2024) · cites this paper as [95]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 161 · Cited by 94
- Authors
- Qiu, S., Liu, Q., Zhou, S., & Huang, W.
- Affiliations
- University of Electronic Science and Technology of China (CN)
- Huawei Technologies (China) (CN)
- Corresponding author
- Qiu, Shilin
- Venue
- Neurocomputing
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2022-07
- Volume
- 492
- Pages
- 278-307
- ISSN
- 0925-2312 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4224215750
- Cited by
- 94
- References
- 161
- Citations by year
- 2026: 23 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 2
- FWCI
- 5.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- Neurocomputing (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Sichuan Province Science and Technology Support Program (2019YFG0399, 2020YFG0472, 2020YFG0031)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Natural Language Processing Techniques
- Keywords
- adversarial attacks, adversarial defense, natural language processing, semantic granularity, adversarial datasets, passive defense, active defense
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review