Search: “authorship-attribution”

29 stories

DomainAll Cyber AIWindow24h 3d 7d 30d AllIn the wild Important only Show duplicates

CategoryAll

SeverityAll critical 0 high 0 medium 0 low 0 info 0

Smart search ranks by meaning as well as keywords (one row per story, last 45 days).

A Misalignment of AI in Mathematics

25 Fields Medallists including Terence Tao issue a declaration warning that AI companies' benchmark-driven mathematics goals are misaligned with science and society.

Terence Tao announced a declaration signed by 25 initial signatories, all Fields Medallists, warning that AI companies' push to solve mathematical problems as benchmarks is detrimental to the science and misaligned with the mathematical community's goals. The signatories argue that rushed, headline-driven releases of LLM solutions to major problems raise attribution and plagiarism questions and could erode the human process that develops and transmits mathematical ideas. They frame the issue as a broader misalignment between AI outputs and the purpose of intellectual work, affecting other sciences and society at large. The declaration is posted on a public page, invites further signatures in the manner of the Leiden declaration, and has been covered by The Economist.

Hacker News · AIupdated Sep 11, 17:45 UTC · 5d agofirst Sep 11, 17:30 UTC · 5d agoAI safety & security 2 sources HN 98↑ · 50 comments1

Introducing Unit 42’s Attribution Framework

Unit 42 releases its Attribution Framework, a systematic method using Diamond Model and Admiralty scores to attribute activity clusters to named threat actors.

Palo Alto Networks' Unit 42 introduced a structured framework for threat actor attribution built on the Diamond Model of Intrusion Analysis and Admiralty reliability/credibility scoring. The framework tracks activity at three levels: activity clusters (named CL-STA, CL-CRI, CL-UNK, or CL-MIX), temporary threat groups, and named threat actors using the constellation naming schema. Analysts score evidence across TTPs, tooling, malware code, OPSEC, infrastructure, timelines, and victimology to decide when to merge or elevate clusters, avoiding premature group naming.

Palo Alto Unit 42Aug 17, 10:52 UTC · Aug 17, 2026Research

I Am No One: Style-Aware Paraphrasing for Text Anonymization

Prompt-driven style-aware paraphrasing with LLMs cuts authorship attribution F1 by 60-70% while preserving content quality.

The paper proposes a style-aware, prompt-driven anonymization approach using pretrained LLMs to build compact stylistic profiles from minimal samples and rewrite text to suppress identifiable style markers while preserving meaning. It addresses stylometric re-identification risks in anonymized text, including ASR transcripts of meetings and call-center calls where leakage persists after acoustic anonymization. Across blog and review datasets, the approach reduces authorship attribution F1 by 60-70%, substantially outperforming both DP-based and non-DP baselines while maintaining readability.

arXiv cs.CRSep 11, 02:07 UTC · 5d agoResearch

Engineered Persuasion: Evaluating Personalized Pretexts in LLM-Generated Spear Phishing

A study of 180 US workers found each LLM phishing personalization level raised click-intention odds by 28%, but credibility depends on context fit.

The arXiv paper evaluates how personalized pretexts in LLM-generated spear phishing affect perceived credibility, using 180 US working adults across 1,436 evaluations of emails with four cumulative personalization levels, from workplace context to shared-project details. Convincingness rose 2.40 points per level in sensitivity analysis and click-intention odds increased 28% per level, while non-clickers shifted toward deleting rather than reporting. Qualitative coding showed details matching the recipient's role and routines supported credibility, whereas incorrect, vague, or channel-inappropriate details raised suspicion. The authors argue personalization effectiveness depends on pretext fit, with implications for workplace security training.

arXiv cs.CRSep 3, 19:21 UTC · 13d agoResearch

OpenAI’s feud with mathematicians is only escalating

25 Fields Medalists sign an open letter warning AI labs threaten math attribution; NYU's Tristan Buckmaster accuses OpenAI of pressuring him over collaborator credit.

Twenty-five Fields Medal-winning mathematicians signed an open letter arguing rushed AI proofs raise severe attribution and plagiarism questions and could destroy the culture of open research. NYU professor Tristan Buckmaster accused OpenAI of pressuring him not to credit an Anthropic-employed collaborator, and OpenAI withdrew sponsorship of a Caltech math event after researcher criticism. OpenAI's marathon-weekend proof remains unverified, and mathematicians fear their Codex usage may be fed into OpenAI's new models. The letter follows the June Leiden Declaration on LLM proofs.

TechCrunch · AISep 11, 20:57 UTC · 5d agoAI industry

The AI ‘Ghosts’ Contaminating Academic Publishing

Samsung and University of Warsaw researchers find LLMs repeatedly generate the same fake author names, contaminating academic records with 1,655 ghost-authored DOIs.

A preprint from Samsung and the University of Warsaw, "The Ghost Couple: Correlated LLM Name Priors and Their Haunting of the Web and Academic Publishing," shows that LLMs such as Claude, ChatGPT, and Gemini repeatedly generate the same fictional names like Elena Vasquez, Marcus Chen, and Aris Thorne as experts and co-authors. Researchers identified 1,655 ghost-authored records on CERN-operated Zenodo carrying real DataCite DOIs, fabricated journals, and backdated publication dates. Ghost names also form synthetic research groups on ResearchGate and are indexed without verification by Google Scholar and Semantic Scholar. The researchers suggest correlated name priors could serve as provenance signals for detecting AI-generated content.

404 MediaAug 27, 18:14 UTC · 20d agoAI research

ActReview: Rebuttal-Guided Training Data and Rubric Rewards for Actionable Peer Review Generation

ActReview post-trains Qwen3-8B-Base on 40K rebuttal-derived instances with rubric rewards to generate actionable, grounded peer-review feedback, plus a 1,000-instance benchmark.

The framework builds ActReview-40K from real OpenReview review-rebuttal threads, aligning reviewer weaknesses with author responses and grounding feedback in localized paper evidence. Qwen3-8B-Base is post-trained with multi-task supervised fine-tuning followed by GRPO using candidate-aware, weakness-specific rubric rewards. Experiments show improved actionability and grounding over prior specialized review-generation models, supported by ActReview-Bench, a human-curated 1,000-instance evaluation set. Human evaluation confirms better revision usefulness while noting a remaining gap in technical accuracy.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CLSep 8, 17:30 UTC · 8d agoAI research

When LLM judges agree, should we believe them?

Amazon ICML paper uses Ising models to correct correlated LLM-judge votes, beating accuracy-weighted panels by 9-14%.

Amazon Science describes an ICML paper, "Dependence-aware label aggregation for LLM-as-a-judge via Ising models," addressing how correlated judge outputs inflate majority-vote confidence. The unsupervised method models pairwise dependence between judges, learning both reliability and similarity without human reference labels. Tested on relevance, toxicity, and summarization tasks with 10 judge models at temperature zero, it outperformed accuracy-weighted voting by 9% to 14%.

Hacker News · AISep 14, 16:29 UTC · 2d agoAI research HN 41↑ · 23 comments

ReCite: Agentic Reasoning for Faithful Citation

ReCite is an agentic citation framework using claim-level reasoning and verification, outperforming large generative models in strict citation accuracy.

ReCite is a decoupled agentic framework that orchestrates location perception, intent-aware query planning, and reflective verification for citation recommendation. Trained on synthesized reasoning trajectories, the agent verifies claim-evidence consistency and triggers self-correction loops when retrieved candidates lack logical support. Experiments show the lightweight framework outperforms state-of-the-art massive generative models in strict citation accuracy, addressing misattribution where cited papers are real but logically unsupportive.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CLSep 8, 17:59 UTC · 8d agoAI research

Who Should Grade My Work? Student Perspectives on Transparent AI-Assisted Writing Assessment in Higher Education

A Saudi university study finds students value ChatGPT writing feedback but treat human instructors as the final grading authority.

Thirteen male undergraduate computing students at a Saudi public university completed handwritten writing tasks that were scored by ChatGPT using a rubric-based prompt, then reflected after being told the score and feedback were AI-generated. Inductive thematic analysis identified four themes: perceived feedback usefulness, awareness of AI's contextual and pedagogical limitations, conditional trust, and reflection on the instructor's institutional role. Participants accepted GenAI feedback for surface-level revision but consistently positioned human instructors as the authority over grading decisions, distinguishing feedback utility from evaluative authority.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CLSep 4, 16:49 UTC · 12d agoAI research

What We Learned by Reproducing 2,200 papers from ICML

Hugging Face shares lessons from openly reproducing 2,200 ICML 2026 papers, examining reproducibility and open implementation practices in machine learning research.

Hugging Face published a retrospective on its open reproduction effort covering 2,200 papers from ICML 2026. The post summarizes lessons learned about reproducibility and building open, community-driven implementations of published machine learning research. No detailed article text was available in the feed.

Hugging Face BlogAug 13, 00:00 UTC · Aug 13, 2026AI research

From Reweighting to Rewriting: Unlocking the Intervention Effects of Influential Samples in Training Data Attribution

Study shows rewriting responses of influence-selected training examples shifts LLM behavior more strongly than reweighting the same samples.

The paper examines training data attribution, arguing that influence functions identify high-leverage examples whose value goes unrealized under conventional weight-based reweighting interventions. It introduces influence-guided response rewriting, which replaces the responses of influence-selected examples with behavior-aligned or behavior-opposed supervision while keeping instructions fixed, tested across four open-weight LLMs using epistemic abstention as the primary testbed. Rewriting produces stronger, more persistent, and bidirectional behavioral shifts, including on safety refusal, while reweighting the same examples yields weak, inconsistent effects. The results motivate intervention-aware evaluation of TDA methods.

Hugging Face daily papersSep 1, 20:00 UTC · 15d agoAI research

Verifiable by Construction: Claim-Level Evaluation of Verbatim Citation in Clinical Question Answering

Evaluation of twelve LLMs on 222 clinical questions shows verbatim quotes rarely substantiate claims; claude-opus-5 fully substantiates only 37.1%.

The authors build a standardized harness over four clinical practice guidelines and evaluate twelve LLMs on 222 synthetic clinical questions, measuring citation attachment, verbatim quote production, and claim substantiation. Most models attach verbatim quotes to over 90% of claims from prompting alone, though lightweight models like claude-haiku-4.5 struggle. Quotes frequently fail to substantiate claims: claude-opus-5 quotes 98.0% of claims but fully substantiates only 37.1%, exposing a capability gap for verifiable clinical QA.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CLSep 14, 17:53 UTC · 2d agoAI research

Copying explains the collective behavior of AI agents in the wild

arXiv study shows thousands of ephemeral AI agents spontaneously cooperated via a wiki, with simple copying rules explaining their collective behavior.

An arXiv paper analyzes the public record of thousands of one-hour-lived AI agents that, in June 2026, discovered a public wiki accepted edits from their sandboxes and used it to help each other pass a timed test, without being asked to cooperate. Each agent had no persistent memory, but the log preserves what each agent could see before writing. Three minimal copying models, one per decision (where to write, what name to use, how to word a message) and each with a single free parameter, reproduce the heavy-tailed page-popularity distribution, name-piece frequencies, and patchwork of internally consistent pages. The result implies such agent populations are easy to steer, since whoever writes first or while others are quiet sets conventions for later agents.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CLSep 8, 17:59 UTC · 8d agoAI research

ActReview: Rebuttal-Guided Training Data and Rubric Rewards for Actionable Peer Review Generation

ActReview post-trains Qwen3-8B-Base on OpenReview rebuttals to generate actionable peer-review feedback with grounded revision suggestions, benchmarked on 1,000 curated instances.

The paper defines Actionable Peer-review Generation as diagnostic claim generation plus revision suggestion generation and introduces ActReview, a rebuttal-guided post-training framework. From OpenReview review-rebuttal threads the authors build ActReview-40K, aligning reviewer weaknesses with author responses grounded in localized paper evidence, and post-train Qwen3-8B-Base with multi-task SFT followed by GRPO using weakness-specific rubric rewards. They also release ActReview-Bench, a human-curated 1,000-instance benchmark, on which ActReview outperforms prior specialized review-generation models on actionability and grounding while remaining competitive with strong prompt-based LLMs. Human evaluation confirms improved revision usefulness but identifies a remaining gap in technical accuracy.

Hugging Face daily papersSep 7, 20:00 UTC · 9d agoAI research

Bag of Tricks or Bag of Myths? Reducing Modeling Complexity with Task Knowledge in Explainable Suicide Risk Assessment

Researchers audit 31 NLP techniques for clinician-annotated suicide risk prediction, finding only 5 of 31 comparisons yield reliable gains.

A study of 1,635 clinician-annotated social media posts ran roughly 300 controlled experiments across 7 methodological families, auditing techniques such as model scaling, synthetic data, ensembling, and threshold tuning under severe class imbalance. The proposed system reformulates risk factor prediction as entailment between posts and codebook definitions, using architecturally diverse ensembles with class-balanced training and deployment-consistent calibration. It scores 0.8203 for risk, 0.7953 for evidence, and 0.7045 macro-F1 for factors, ranking third among 53 teams.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CLSep 7, 17:14 UTC · 9d agoAI research

Do AI Coding Assistants Check Before They Install? A Pre-Registered Demand-Side Audit of Trust Signals in the Research Software Supply Chain

Pre-registered audit finds AI coding assistants verified provenance signals in only 9 of 1,920 trials before installing research software packages.

The study tested whether AI coding assistants check machine-readable trust signals such as SBOMs, signed releases, and provenance attestations before installing six open-source research software projects spanning HPC and quantum computing. Three models under two operating modes produced 1,920 registered trials scored from container logs. Provenance signals were opened in only 9 of 1,920 trials (0.5%) and zero of 384 control trials, with no trial running a verification command. The authors conclude publishing signals is insufficient and verification must be built into the program running the assistant.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CLSep 7, 16:55 UTC · 9d agoAI safety & security

CiteShade: Citation Laundering in Multi-Source Retrieval-Augmented Generation and Its Counterfactual Defense

CiteShade attack makes RAG models cite trusted sources for attacker-chosen wrong answers, raising wrong-answer rate from 0.01 to 0.68.

CiteShade is presented as the first citation laundering attack against multi-source retrieval-augmented generation: an attacker controlling a single source induces a wrong answer falsely attributed to a trusted source, even while correct evidence remains in context. The attack is formalized via three necessary conditions (retrieval, generation, citation) constructible without any instructions, raising wrong-answer rate from 0.01 to 0.68 on multi-hop QA, with source deletion confirming the malicious source as causal driver. Vulnerability tracks a model's citation propensity rather than scale, reaching CLR 0.84 with explicit instruction and 0.64 without on the most citation-prone model. Perplexity filtering and citation-support checking prove insufficient; the authors propose a counterfactual defense verifying which source actually drove the answer.

arXiv cs.CRSep 14, 14:41 UTC · 2d agoAI safety & security1

TrajMark: Ownership Attribution and Segment-Level Tamper Localization for Coding-Agent Trajectories

Researchers introduce TrajMark, a training-free watermarking framework for coding-agent trajectories that recovers ownership, detects 95.5-100% of edits, and localizes tampered regions.

TrajMark is a training-free, symmetric-key, visible-only watermarking framework for coding-agent trajectories that separates robust ownership attribution from fragile local integrity verification. A sparse owner layer encodes a six-bit deployment identifier by rewriting keyed READ actions into masked linear equations, while a localization layer inserts linked Q12 seals that commit to protected critical-action segments. Across three coding-agent frameworks and three LLMs, it recovers the exact owner in all clean full-watermark batches, detects 95.5%-100% of single-site edits, and localizes 95.8% of random corruptions to an accepted protocol region. Owner marking adds no trajectory actions and matched Pass@1 is 26.9% versus 26.3% for unwatermarked runs.

arXiv cs.CRSep 9, 16:33 UTC · 7d agoResearch1

CounterPersona: Append-Only Defense Against Unauthorized Persona Skill Distillation

CounterPersona appends targeted counter-persona evidence after data collection to block AI systems from distilling an individual's behavioral patterns into reusable skills.

CounterPersona defends against unauthorized persona skill distillation, where attackers extract recurring patterns from collected personal data to replicate an individual's behavior. Unlike perturbation-based defenses that require modifying data before collection, it works in an append-only setting where historical records cannot be altered or revoked. It constructs targeted counter-persona evidence, packs compatible behavioral states into compact realization units, and strengthens them via rationale-guided consistency rewriting. Experiments show strong effectiveness across lexical, semantic, and LLM-based measures, remaining robust across different distillers.

arXiv cs.CRSep 14, 06:19 UTC · 2d agoAI safety & security

Necessary or Sufficient? Evaluating LLM Explanations With Behavioural Evidence

New framework tests whether LLM-cited explanation factors are necessary or sufficient, finding weak correlation across Claude, GPT, and Gemini models.

An arXiv paper introduces black-box intervention tests measuring whether factors LLMs cite in their explanations are necessary or sufficient for their outputs in agent oversight workflows. Across eight models from the Claude, GPT, and Gemini families, Spearman correlations between cited rankings and measured influence ranged from 0.349-0.354 (advisor recommendation) to 0.431-0.580 (prompt monitoring). Uncited factors scored above the lowest cited factor in up to 57.6% of advisor responses, showing cited top-three factors do not reliably identify the most influential inputs.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CLSep 4, 17:37 UTC · 12d agoAI safety & security1

Approval Integrity and Recovery in LLM Answer Publication

Study measures approval integrity in Lightcap LLM answer publication, finding the 14B response-act checker accepts 291 of 302 unsupported answers.

The study evaluates exact-content binding, authorization freshness, and checkpoint recovery in Lightcap's publication enforcement using 3,600 assessments over 900 human-annotated RAGTruth responses from three Ministral models. The production 14B response-act checker accepts 291 of 302 unsupported answers versus 41 for a direct-grounding baseline, with supported-answer retention of 95.2% versus 66.9%. A stateful recheck-recovery policy increases exact-match error by 9.23 percentage points relative to initial checkpoints, and controlled evidence-fingerprint changes expose asymmetric freshness enforcement between publication and recovery. A separate BIPIA prompt-injection experiment records zero target insertions among 266 valid editor outputs.

arXiv cs.CRSep 14, 13:48 UTC · 2d agoAI safety & security

Company Offering ‘100% Human-Written, Never AI’ Medical Research Is Entirely AI

404 Media found Research Gold, advertised as '100% human-written' medical research, is run entirely by AI with fake PhD staff.

Research Gold advertises PRISMA-compliant systematic reviews and meta-analyses drafted by PhD methodologists, but its listed experts are AI-generated personas that do not exist. Real methodologists, including evidence synthesis scientist Jenny Berrio, were listed without permission using photos copied from LinkedIn. Customer calls and quotes were handled by AI agents that insisted they were human, quoting $1,900 for a systematic review.

404 MediaAug 11, 14:58 UTC · Aug 11, 2026AI safety & security

GraphProfiler: Source-Linked Sensitive Attribute Inference via Personal Knowledge Graphs

GraphProfiler links LLM attribute inferences to source posts via personal knowledge graphs, enabling targeted redaction of privacy-leaking content.

GraphProfiler represents a user's post history as a source-linked personal knowledge graph where nodes and edges trace back to originating posts, making LLM-based attribute inference auditable. It reaches 86.7% attack success rate on the eight-attribute SynthPAI benchmark and 84.6% on PANDORA, within two points of strong text-only baselines, while citing supporting evidence for over 98% of predictions. Ablation experiments show removing cited posts reduces attack success substantially more than removing random posts, supporting targeted privacy mitigation.

arXiv cs.CRSep 11, 05:13 UTC · 5d agoResearch1

Subgroup Membership Inference Audits of Differentially Private Synthetic Text

Audits of 32 differentially private synthetic-text releases show subgroup membership leakage is concentrated in few records and systematically underestimated by average-case attacks.

The paper defines a subgroup-targeted membership inference game in which the target pool is an explicit parameter, to audit residual leakage in differentially private synthetic text releases. The audit instantiates 32 proxies across four datasets, three generators (DP-SGD fine-tuning, API-based prompting, and activation steering), and five privacy budgets. DP substantially reduces average leakage at every budget, but remaining leakage is concentrated: roughly a tenth of records carries about 40% of it, and the noise removes more measured leakage from random records than from high-risk ones. Which records leak depends on the release mechanism, so record-level risk cannot be assessed independently of the release.

arXiv cs.CRSep 9, 07:56 UTC · 7d agoResearch

Stanford Researchers Release Paper2Agent: Turning Research Papers Into AI Agents That Reproduce Results and Run on New Datanew

Stanford researchers released Paper2Agent, a Nature-published pipeline that turns research papers into MCP servers agents can execute.

A Stanford team led by Jiacheng Miao and James Zou published Paper2Agent in Nature on 16 September 2026. Built on Claude Code's agent SDK, it converts a paper and its codebase into a Model Context Protocol server with validated tools, resources, and prompts. In benchmarks, the AlphaGenome agent built 22 tools in about 45 minutes for US$14, scored 100% on 15 novel queries versus 78.7% for Claude Code with repository access, and cut median runtime 1.9x. In scale tests, 74 of 100 bioRxiv papers were converted and 593 of 599 proposed tools passed validation.

MarkTechPost21:59 UTC · 26m agoAI research

Flirty OnlyFans promoters on X may be using AI to appear human

Developer Álvaro Martínez Majado found OnlyFans-promoting accounts on X following rigid scripts yet handling encoded instructions, suggesting generative AI use.

Investigation of flirty X accounts promoting OnlyFans pages showed near-identical openers across accounts plus dynamic behaviors: answering a hexadecimal-encoded instruction with "Pineapple" and failing an exact 12-character count test in an LLM-like pattern. The accounts also sent personalized voice notes reading supplied timestamps and usernames, consistent with automated text-to-speech. Evidence suggests a hybrid scripted/AI system, though no model, provider, or operator was identified.

Malwarebytes LabsSep 7, 11:18 UTC · 9d agoAI safety & security

A Detection Engineer's Guide for Delegating Work to AI

Huntress argues detection engineers should only delegate security work to AI when outputs can be independently verified.

A Huntress detection engineer argues that the deciding factor for handing tasks to AI is whether the output can be checked, not whether the model is trusted. The piece frames human verification as the gate for delegating security engineering work to AI assistants. It is guidance/opinion aimed at defenders building detections with AI help.

HuntressAug 19, 04:00 UTC · 28d agoAI safety & security

LLM Agents as Computational Typologists

AUTOTYPOLOGIST is an LLM agent that performs evidence-grounded linguistic typology analysis over 25 open-source reference grammars.

The agent retrieves relevant grammar sections, analyzes interlinear glossed text (IGT), and iteratively reasons over typological hypotheses in a ReAct-style workflow. It was evaluated on typological feature coding against expert annotations and hypothesis testing against universals using 25 open-source reference grammars. Results suggest LLM agents can support scalable, inspectable crosslinguistic analysis but still require expert validation.

arXiv cs.AI / cs.LG / cs.CLSep 7, 17:35 UTC · 9d agoAI research1