ResearchTrend.AI
  • Papers
  • Communities
  • Events
  • Blog
  • Pricing
Papers
Communities
Social Events
Terms and Conditions
Pricing
Parameter LabParameter LabTwitterGitHubLinkedInBlueskyYoutube

© 2025 ResearchTrend.AI, All rights reserved.

  1. Home
  2. Papers
  3. 2410.05573
37
0

TaeBench: Improving Quality of Toxic Adversarial Examples

8 October 2024
Xuan Zhu
Dmitriy Bespalov
Liwen You
Ninad Kulkarni
Yanjun Qi
    AAML
ArXivPDFHTML
Abstract

Toxicity text detectors can be vulnerable to adversarial examples - small perturbations to input text that fool the systems into wrong detection. Existing attack algorithms are time-consuming and often produce invalid or ambiguous adversarial examples, making them less useful for evaluating or improving real-world toxicity content moderators. This paper proposes an annotation pipeline for quality control of generated toxic adversarial examples (TAE). We design model-based automated annotation and human-based quality verification to assess the quality requirements of TAE. Successful TAE should fool a target toxicity model into making benign predictions, be grammatically reasonable, appear natural like human-generated text, and exhibit semantic toxicity. When applying these requirements to more than 20 state-of-the-art (SOTA) TAE attack recipes, we find many invalid samples from a total of 940k raw TAE attack generations. We then utilize the proposed pipeline to filter and curate a high-quality TAE dataset we call TaeBench (of size 264k). Empirically, we demonstrate that TaeBench can effectively transfer-attack SOTA toxicity content moderation models and services. Our experiments also show that TaeBench with adversarial training achieve significant improvements of the robustness of two toxicity detectors.

View on arXiv
@article{zhu2025_2410.05573,
  title={ TaeBench: Improving Quality of Toxic Adversarial Examples },
  author={ Xuan Zhu and Dmitriy Bespalov and Liwen You and Ninad Kulkarni and Yanjun Qi },
  journal={arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.05573},
  year={ 2025 }
}
Comments on this paper