A Comprehensive Overview of Backdoor Attacks in Large Language Models Within Communication Networks
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Large Language Models (LLMs) are poised to offer efficient and intelligent services for future mobile communication networks, owing to their exceptional capabilities in language comprehension and generation. However, the extremely high data and computational resource requirements for the performance of LLMs compel developers to resort to outsourcing training or utilizing third-party data and computing resources. These strategies may expose the model within the network to maliciously manipulated training data and processing, providing an opportunity for attackers to embed a hidden backdoor into the model, termed a backdoor attack. Backdoor attack in LLMs refers to embedding a hidden backdoor in LLMs that causes the model to perform normally on benign samples but exhibit degraded performance on poisoned ones. This issue is particularly concerning within communication networks where reliability and security are paramount. Despite the extensive research on backdoor attacks, there remains a lack of in-depth exploration specifically within the context of LLMs employed in communication networks, and a systematic review of such attacks is currently absent. In this survey, we systematically propose a taxonomy of backdoor attacks in LLMs as used in communication networks, dividing them into four major categories: <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">input-triggered</i> , <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">prompt-triggered</i> , <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">instruction-triggered</i> , and <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">demonstration-triggered</i> attacks. Furthermore, we conduct a comprehensive analysis of the benchmark datasets. Finally, we identify potential problems and open challenges, offering valuable insights into future research directions for enhancing the security and integrity of LLMs in communication networks.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it