Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Oskar John Hollinsworth
dblp:359/3794
· DBLP profile ↗
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
2since 2021 · last 2026
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 2 since 2021Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Artificial intelligence
2 papers |
Trustworthy machine learning · 79% Language models and text generation · 21% | |
| Network and information security
1 paper |
Security and privacy of machine learning · 100% |
Topics — the 10 heaviest of 10, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › adversarial machine learning
jailbreak attack |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | STACK: Adversarial Attacks on LLM Safeguard Pipelines · AAAI 2026 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
large language model safety |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | STACK: Adversarial Attacks on LLM Safeguard Pipelines · AAAI 2026 |
Security and privacy of machine learning
adversarial attack |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | STACK: Adversarial Attacks on LLM Safeguard Pipelines · AAAI 2026 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › robustness
adversarial robustness |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Scaling Trends in Language Model Robustness · ICML 2025 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › robustness › adversarial robustness
adversarial training |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Scaling Trends in Language Model Robustness · ICML 2025 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › large language model trustworthiness
large language model robustness |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Scaling Trends in Language Model Robustness · ICML 2025 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
robustness |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Scaling Trends in Language Model Robustness · ICML 2025 |
Security and privacy of machine learning
red teaming |
0.3 | 1 | 2026 | STACK: Adversarial Attacks on LLM Safeguard Pipelines · AAAI 2026 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › generative model safety
jailbreak robustness |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Scaling Trends in Language Model Robustness · ICML 2025 |
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
large language model |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Scaling Trends in Language Model Robustness · ICML 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
transfer attack · 2.0staged attack · 2.0few-shot prompting · 2.0black-box attack · 2.0scaling analysis · 0.9adversarial training · 0.9
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | STACK: Adversarial Attacks on LLM Safeguard PipelinesabstractFrontier AI developers are relying on layers of safeguards to protect against catastrophic misuse of AI systems. Anthropic guards their latest Claude 4 Opus model using one such defense pipeline, and other frontier developers including Google DeepMind and OpenAI pledge to soon deploy similar defenses. However, the security of such pipelines is unclear, with limited prior work evaluating or attacking these pipelines. We address this gap by developing and red-teaming an open-source defense pipeline. 1 First, we find that a novel few-shot-prompted input and output classifier outperforms state-of-the-art open-weight safeguard model ShieldGemma across three attacks and two datasets, reducing the attack success rate (ASR) to 0% on the catastrophic misuse dataset ClearHarm. Second, we introduce a STaged AttaCK (STACK) procedure that achieves 71% ASR on ClearHarm in a black-box attack against the few-shot-prompted classifier pipeline. Finally, we also evaluate STACK in a transfer setting, achieving 33% ASR, providing initial evidence that it is feasible to design attacks with no access to the target pipeline. We conclude by suggesting specific mitigations that developers could use to thwart staged attacks. Ian R. McKenzie, Oskar John Hollinsworth, Tom Tseng, Xander Davies, Stephen Casper, Aaron D. Tucker, Robert Kirk, Adam Gleave |
AAAI | 2 |
| 2025 | Scaling Trends in Language Model RobustnessabstractIncreasing model size has unlocked a dazzling array of capabilities in language models.
At the same time, even frontier models remain vulnerable to jailbreaks and prompt injections, despite concerted efforts to make them robust.
As both attackers and defenders gain access to more compute, and as models become larger, what will be the effect on robustness?
We argue that to answer this question requires a *scaling lens*, which we adopt in an extensive study of language model robustness across several classification tasks, model families, and adversarial attacks.
We find that in the absence of explicit safety training, larger models are not consistently more robust; however, scale improves sample efficiency in adversarial training, though it worsens compute efficiency.
Further, we find that increasing attack compute smoothly improves attack success rate against both undefended and adversarially trained models.
Finally, after exploring robustness transfer across attacks and threat models, we combine attack and defense scaling rates to study the offense-defense balance.
We find that while attack scaling outpaces adversarial training across all models studied, larger adversarially trained models might give defense the advantage in the long run.
These results underscore the utility of the scaling lens, and provide a paradigm for evaluating future attacks and defenses on frontier models.
Code for this project is available at https://github.com/AlignmentResearch/scaling-llm-robustness-paper. Nikolaus H. R. Howe, Ian R. McKenzie, Oskar John Hollinsworth, Michal Zajac 0005, Tom Tseng, Aaron D. Tucker, Pierre-Luc Bacon, Adam Gleave |
ICML | 3 |