Large language models (LLMs) have notably revolutionized many domains within natural language processing due to their exceptional performance. Their security has become increasingly vital. This study is centered on protecting LLMs against unauthorized access and potential theft. We propose a simple yet effective protective measure wherein a unique key prompt is embedded within the LLM. This mechanism enables the model to respond only when presented with the correct key prompt; otherwise, LLMs will refuse to react to any input instructions. This key prompt protection offers a robust solution to prevent the unauthorized use of LLMs, as the model becomes unusable without the correct key. We evaluated the proposed protection on multiple LLMs and NLP tasks. Results demonstrate that our method can successfully protect the LLM without significantly impacting the model’s original function. Moreover, we demonstrate potential attacks that attempt to bypass the protection mechanism will adversely affect the model’s performance, further emphasizing the effectiveness of the proposed protection method.

Chain of Thought (CoT) is significant in improving the reasoning abilities of large language models (LLMs). However, the correlation between the effectiveness of CoT and the length of reasoning steps in prompts remains largely unknown. To shed light on this, we have conducted several empirical experiments to explore the relations. Specifically, we design experiments that expand and compress the rationale reasoning steps within CoT demonstrations, while keeping all other factors constant. We have the following key findings. First, the results indicate that lengthening the reasoning steps in prompts, even without adding new information into the prompt, considerably enhances LLMs’ reasoning abilities across multiple datasets. Alternatively, shortening the reasoning steps, even while preserving the key information, significantly diminishes the reasoning abilities of models. This finding highlights the importance of the number of steps in CoT prompts and provides practical guidance to make better use of LLMs’ potential in complex problem-solving scenarios. Second, we also investigated the relationship between the performance of CoT and the rationales used in demonstrations. Surprisingly, the result shows that even incorrect rationales can yield favorable outcomes if they maintain the requisite length of inference. Third, we observed that the advantages of increasing reasoning steps are task-dependent: simpler tasks require fewer steps, whereas complex tasks gain significantly from longer inference sequences.

Human-like social bias of pre-trained language models (PLMs) on downstream tasks have attracted increasing attention. The potential flaws in the training data are the main factor that causes unfairness in PLMs. Existing data-centric debiasing strategies mainly leverage explicit bias words (defined as sensitive attribute words specific to demographic groups) for counterfactual data augmentation to balance the training data. However, they lack consideration of implicit bias words potentially associated with explicit bias words in complex distribution data, which indirectly harms the fairness of PLMs. To this end, we propose a **Data**-Centric **Debias**ing method (named Data-Debias), which uses an explainability method to search for implicit bias words to assist in debiasing PLMs. Specifically, we compute the feature attributions of all tokens using the Integrated Gradients method, and then treat the tokens that have a large impact on the model’s decision as implicit bias words. To make the search results more precise, we iteratively train a biased model to amplify the bias with each iteration. Finally, we use the implicit bias words searched in the last iteration to assist in debiasing PLMs. Extensive experimental results on multiple PLMs debiasing on three different classification tasks demonstrate that Data-Debias achieves state-of-the-art debiasing performance and strong generalization while maintaining predictive abilities.

Recent research has shown that large language models rely on spurious correlations in the data for natural language understanding (NLU) tasks. In this work, we aim to answer the following research question: Can we reduce spurious correlations by modifying the ground truth labels of the training data? Specifically, we propose a simple yet effective debiasing framework, named Soft Label Encoding (SoftLE). First, we train a teacher model to quantify each sample’s degree of relying on shortcuts. Then, we encode this shortcut degree into a dummy class and use it to smooth the original ground truth labels, generating soft labels. These soft labels are used to train a more robust student model that reduces spurious correlations between shortcut features and certain classes. Extensive experiments on two NLU benchmark tasks via two language models demonstrate that SoftLE significantly improves out-of-distribution generalization while maintaining satisfactory in-distribution accuracy. Our code is available at https://github.com/ZiruiHE99/sle

Deep learning has introduced significant improvements in many software analysis tasks. Although the Large Language Models (LLMs) based neural code models demonstrate commendable performance when trained and tested within the intra-project independent and identically distributed (IID) setting, they often struggle to generalize effectively to real-world inter-project out-of-distribution (OOD) data. In this work, we show that this phenomenon is caused by the heavy reliance on project-specific shortcuts for prediction instead of ground-truth evidence. We propose a Cond-Idf measurement to interpret this behavior, which quantifies the relatedness of a token with a label and its project-specificness. The strong correlation between model behavior and the proposed measurement indicates that without proper regularization, models tend to leverage spurious statistical cues for prediction. Equipped with these observations, we propose a novel bias mitigation mechanism that regularizes the model’s learning behavior by leveraging latent logic relations among samples. Experimental results on two representative program analysis tasks indicate that our mitigation framework can improve both inter-project OOD generalization and adversarial robustness, while not sacrificing accuracy on intra-project IID data.

As the representation capability of Pre-trained Language Models (PLMs) improve, there is growing concern that they will inherit social biases from unprocessed corpora. Most previous debiasing techniques used Counterfactual Data Augmentation (CDA) to balance the training corpus. However, CDA slightly modifies the original corpus, limiting the representation distance between different demographic groups to a narrow range. As a result, the debiasing model easily fits the differences between counterfactual pairs, which affects its debiasing performance with limited text resources. In this paper, we propose an adversarial training-inspired two-stage debiasing model using Contrastive learning with Continuous Prompt Augmentation (named CCPA) to mitigate social biases in PLMs’ encoding. In the first stage, we propose a data augmentation method based on continuous prompt tuning to push farther the representation distance between sample pairs along different demographic groups. In the second stage, we utilize contrastive learning to pull closer the representation distance between the augmented sample pairs and then fine-tune PLMs’ parameters to get debiased encoding. Our approach guides the model to achieve stronger debiasing performance by adding difficulty to the training process. Extensive experiments show that CCPA outperforms baselines in terms of debiasing performance. Meanwhile, experimental results on the GLUE benchmark show that CCPA retains the language modeling capability of PLMs.

Recent work has focused on compressing pre-trained language models (PLMs) like BERT where the major focus has been to improve the in-distribution performance for downstream tasks. However, very few of these studies have analyzed the impact of compression on the generalizability and robustness of compressed models for out-of-distribution (OOD) data. Towards this end, we study two popular model compression techniques including knowledge distillation and pruning and show that the compressed models are significantly less robust than their PLM counterparts on OOD test sets although they obtain similar performance on in-distribution development sets for a task. Further analysis indicates that the compressed models overfit on the shortcut samples and generalize poorly on the hard ones. We further leverage this observation to develop a regularization strategy for robust model compression based on sample uncertainty.

Recent studies indicate that NLU models are prone to rely on shortcut features for prediction, without achieving true language understanding. As a result, these models fail to generalize to real-world out-of-distribution data. In this work, we show that the words in the NLU training set can be modeled as a long-tailed distribution. There are two findings: 1) NLU models have strong preference for features located at the head of the long-tailed distribution, and 2) Shortcut features are picked up during very early few iterations of the model training. These two observations are further employed to formulate a measurement which can quantify the shortcut degree of each training sample. Based on this shortcut measurement, we propose a shortcut mitigation framework LGTR, to suppress the model from making overconfident predictions for samples with large shortcut degree. Experimental results on three NLU benchmarks demonstrate that our long-tailed distribution explanation accurately reflects the shortcut learning behavior of NLU models. Experimental analysis further indicates that LGTR can improve the generalization accuracy on OOD data, while preserving the accuracy on in-distribution data.