Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
freem
Search
Search
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Openai/692e337f-58e4-8007-8044-351091f84b8b
(section)
Add languages
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
Edit source
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
Edit source
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Special pages
Page information
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
==== - There is a well-studied phenomenon called data poisoning: malicious actors deliberately insert corrupted or adversarial data into training or retrieval datasets for machine-learning models. IBM<ref>{{cite web|title=IBM|url=https://www.ibm.com/think/topics/data-poisoning|publisher=ibm.com|access-date=2025-12-01}}</ref> ==== * According to a recent systematic review, there are multiple classes of “poisoning attacks” against large language models (LLMs), including “persistent poisons,” “stealthy poisons,” “concept poisons,” and “task-specific poisons.” arXiv<ref>{{cite web|title=arXiv|url=https://arxiv.org/html/2506.06518v1|publisher=arxiv.org|access-date=2025-12-01}}</ref> * Empirical research demonstrates that even a very small fraction of malicious documents can be enough to change model behavior. For example, poisoning only 0.1% of pre-training data was sufficient for “belief manipulation, jailbreaking, or backdoor” behavior to persist even after fine-tuning. arXiv<ref>{{cite web|title=arXiv|url=https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.13722|publisher=arxiv.org|access-date=2025-12-01}}</ref> * Another more recent study found that as little as 250 malicious documents (≈ 0.00016% of total training tokens) sufficed to backdoor models up to 13B parameters — suggesting that model size does not inherently defend against poisoning. Anthropic<ref>{{cite web|title=Anthropic|url=https://www.anthropic.com/research/small-samples-poison|publisher=anthropic.com|access-date=2025-12-01}}</ref> * Beyond pre-training, “retrieval-augmented generation” (RAG) pipelines are also vulnerable: attackers can poison the retrieval corpus (e.g. web data, document stores) so that when the AI fetches context, it includes manipulated or malicious content — affecting outputs. arXiv<ref>{{cite web|title=arXiv|url=https://arxiv.org/html/2402.07867v1|publisher=arxiv.org|access-date=2025-12-01}}</ref> Implication: the general concept of “AI poison” — i.e. corrupting training/knowledge data to alter model outputs or embed backdoors — is real, documented, and nontrivial to defend against.
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to freem are considered to be released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 (see
Freem:Copyrights
for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource.
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)