Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

Scaling Trends in Language Model Robustness

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2407.18213 v5 pith:GNPVSJP2 submitted 2024-07-25 cs.LG cs.AIcs.CLcs.CR

classification cs.LGcs.AIcs.CLcs.CR
keywords modelsattackscalingmodelrobustnessacrossadversarialattacks
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Increasing model size has unlocked a dazzling array of capabilities in modern language models. At the same time, even frontier models remain vulnerable to jailbreaks and prompt injections, despite concerted efforts to make them robust. As both attack and defense gain access to more compute, and as models become larger, what happens to robustness? We argue that to answer this question requires a \emph{scaling} approach, which we employ in an extensive study of language model robustness across several classification tasks, model families, and adversarial attacks. We find that in the absence of explicit safety training, larger models are not consistently more robust; however, scale improves sample efficiency in adversarial training, though it worsens compute efficiency. Further, we find that increasing attack compute smoothly improves attack success rate against both undefended and adversarially trained models. Finally, after exploring robustness transfer across attacks and threat models, we combine attack and defense scaling rates to study the offense-defense balance. We find that while attack scaling outpaces adversarial training across all models studied, larger adversarially trained models might give defense the advantage in the long run. These results underscore the utility of the scaling lens, and provide a paradigm for evaluating future attacks and defenses on frontier models.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Chasing Moving Targets with Online Self-Play Reinforcement Learning for Safer Language Models

    cs.LG 2025-06 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    Online self-play between attacker and defender roles of a single LLM improves safety robustness and attack diversity across Llama and Qwen models.

  2. Efficient LLM Adversarial Training via Low-Rank Defense and Circuit-Guided Surrogates

    cs.LG 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Combining suffix-window representation finetuning with an ActGrad-pruned surrogate cuts latent-adversarial-training FLOPs per step by 48.1% with only 0.0118% trainable parameters, while accepting higher attack success rates.

  3. Can You Trick the Grader? Adversarial Persuasion of LLM Judges

    cs.CL 2025-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Strategically inserted persuasive sentences inflate LLM judges' scores for incorrect math solutions across six benchmarks and fourteen models, but the study lacks length-matched controls separating rhetoric from lengt...

  4. We Should Identify and Mitigate Third-Party Safety Risks in MCP-Powered Agent Systems

    cs.LG 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    MCP-powered LLM agents are vulnerable to prompt injection from third-party services, and simple detection or filtering defenses do not reliably stop these attacks.

Pith tools