Pith. sign in

REVIEW 9 cited by

On the Risk of Misinformation Pollution with Large Language Models

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 2305.13661 v2 pith:W7J2HRZU submitted 2023-05-23 cs.CL cs.AI

classification cs.CLcs.AI
keywords misinformationllmsaddresslanguagelargellm-generatedmisusemodels
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

In this paper, we comprehensively investigate the potential misuse of modern Large Language Models (LLMs) for generating credible-sounding misinformation and its subsequent impact on information-intensive applications, particularly Open-Domain Question Answering (ODQA) systems. We establish a threat model and simulate potential misuse scenarios, both unintentional and intentional, to assess the extent to which LLMs can be utilized to produce misinformation. Our study reveals that LLMs can act as effective misinformation generators, leading to a significant degradation in the performance of ODQA systems. To mitigate the harm caused by LLM-generated misinformation, we explore three defense strategies: prompting, misinformation detection, and majority voting. While initial results show promising trends for these defensive strategies, much more work needs to be done to address the challenge of misinformation pollution. Our work highlights the need for further research and interdisciplinary collaboration to address LLM-generated misinformation and to promote responsible use of LLMs.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 9 Pith papers

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

  1. Information Discernment in Large Language Models

    cs.AI 2026-05 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    LLMs update their stated numeric beliefs almost regardless of source reliability or whether a claim moves them closer to the truth, performing near chance on both dimensions.

  2. DisarmRAG: Stealthy Retriever-Centric Poisoning to Disable Self-Correction in Retrieval-Augmented Generation (Extended Version)

    cs.CR 2025-08 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    DisarmRAG compromises the retriever to inject anti-self-correction instructions, achieving over 90% attack success across six LLMs while evading basic detection.

  3. Helpful Agent Meets Deceptive Judge: Understanding Vulnerabilities in Agentic Workflows

    cs.AI 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    LLM agents frequently switch correct answers after one round of misleading feedback, and the new WAFER-QA benchmark measures this with web-backed critiques.

  4. A Symbolic Adversarial Learning Framework for Evolving Fake News Generation and Detection

    cs.CL 2025-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    SALF uses adversarial LLM prompt-refinement and debate to make fake news harder to detect (detector F1 drops up to 53% in Chinese, 34% in English) while its oracle-informed detector improves by 7.7%.

  5. An Audit and Analysis of LLM-Assisted Health Misinformation Jailbreaks Against LLMs

    cs.CL 2025-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    LLM-generated jailbreak prompts elicited health misinformation from GPT-3.5, Llama 3.1-8B, and Gemini 2.0 Flash at high rates, and both LLM judges and simple classifiers detected the resulting texts with high accuracy.

  6. Can LLM Improve for Expert Forecast Combination? Evidence from the European Central Bank Survey

    stat.AP 2025-06 reject novelty 5.0 of 10

    A zero-shot LLM prompt beats equal-weighted averaging for one-year ECB SPF forecasts in one regression, but the result is fragile, the comparison is asymmetric, and no code or data are provided.

  7. Two Experts Are All You Need for Steering Thinking: Reinforcing Cognitive Effort in MoE Reasoning Models Without Additional Training

    cs.AI 2025-05 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Reinforcing the two experts most correlated with thinking tokens improves reasoning accuracy and efficiency in MoE large reasoning models, with gains of up to 10 points on AIME benchmarks.

  8. Embodied AI: Emerging Risks and Opportunities for Policy Action

    cs.CY 2025-08 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A policy analysis arguing that embodied AI risks are real, under-covered by current US/EU/UK frameworks, and best handled through certification, benchmarks, clarified liability, and economic adaptation.

  9. A Survey on Data Security in Large Language Models

    cs.CR 2025-08 conditional novelty 2.0 of 10

    A survey of data security risks in LLMs that organizes threats, defenses, and evaluation datasets, with notable factual errors in its tables.

Pith tools