Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Luke Bailey
dblp:171/4369
· DBLP profile ↗
4ranked-venue papers
1as first author
4since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · unresolved
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 1 first-author · 3 since 2021Systems, architecture and hardware · 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.
| Network and information security
3 papers |
Security and privacy of machine learning · 86% Systems and software security · 14% | |
| Artificial intelligence
2 papers |
Trustworthy machine learning · 40% Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning · 40% Vision and language · 20% | |
| Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper |
Hardware accelerators and domain-specific architectures · 100% |
Topics — the 15 heaviest of 15, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Security and privacy of machine learning
adversarial attack |
1.6 | 2 | 2025 | Failures to Find Transferable Image Jailbreaks Between Vision-Language Models · ICLR 2025 Image Hijacks: Adversarial Images can Control Generative Models at Runtime · ICML 2024 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
robustness |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Failures to Find Transferable Image Jailbreaks Between Vision-Language Models · ICLR 2025 |
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › robustness › adversarial attack
transfer attack |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Failures to Find Transferable Image Jailbreaks Between Vision-Language Models · ICLR 2025 |
Computer vision › Vision and language
vision-language model |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Failures to Find Transferable Image Jailbreaks Between Vision-Language Models · ICLR 2025 |
Security and privacy of machine learning
adversarial example |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Image Hijacks: Adversarial Images can Control Generative Models at Runtime · ICML 2024 |
Security and privacy of machine learning › large language model alignment
behavior alignment |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Image Hijacks: Adversarial Images can Control Generative Models at Runtime · ICML 2024 |
Security and privacy of machine learning
prompt injection |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Tensor Trust: Interpretable Prompt Injection Attacks from an Online Game · ICLR 2024 |
Security and privacy of machine learning › adversarial attack › multimodal adversarial attack
vision-language model attack |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Image Hijacks: Adversarial Images can Control Generative Models at Runtime · ICML 2024 |
Systems and software security
vulnerability discovery |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Tensor Trust: Interpretable Prompt Injection Attacks from an Online Game · ICLR 2024 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › statistical inference
bayesian inference |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | CoopMC: Algorithm-Architecture Co-Optimization for Markov Chain Monte Carlo Accelerators · HPCA 2022 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › monte carlo methods › markov chain monte carlo
gibbs sampling |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | CoopMC: Algorithm-Architecture Co-Optimization for Markov Chain Monte Carlo Accelerators · HPCA 2022 |
Machine learning › Probabilistic and Bayesian machine learning › monte carlo methods
markov chain monte carlo |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | CoopMC: Algorithm-Architecture Co-Optimization for Markov Chain Monte Carlo Accelerators · HPCA 2022 |
Hardware accelerators and domain-specific architectures
machine learning accelerator |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | CoopMC: Algorithm-Architecture Co-Optimization for Markov Chain Monte Carlo Accelerators · HPCA 2022 |
Hardware accelerators and domain-specific architectures › scientific computing accelerator
MCMC accelerator |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | CoopMC: Algorithm-Architecture Co-Optimization for Markov Chain Monte Carlo Accelerators · HPCA 2022 |
Hardware accelerators and domain-specific architectures
algorithm-hardware co-design |
0.2 | 1 | 2022 | CoopMC: Algorithm-Architecture Co-Optimization for Markov Chain Monte Carlo Accelerators · HPCA 2022 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
gradient-based optimization · 1.7ensemble attack · 1.7tree-based gibbs sampler · 1.1log-domain kernel fusion · 1.1dynamic normalization · 1.1LUT-based exponential kernel · 1.1prompt matching · 0.8large language model · 0.8adversarial perturbation · 0.8
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Failures to Find Transferable Image Jailbreaks Between Vision-Language ModelsabstractThe integration of new modalities into frontier AI systems offers exciting capabilities, but also increases the possibility such systems can be adversarially manipulated in undesirable ways.
In this work, we focus on a popular class of vision-language models (VLMs) that generate text outputs conditioned on visual and textual inputs.
We conducted a large-scale empirical study to assess the transferability of gradient-based universal image "jailbreaks" using a diverse set of over 40 open-parameter VLMs, including 18 new VLMs that we publicly release.
Overall, we find that transferable gradient-based image jailbreaks are extremely difficult to obtain.
When an image jailbreak is optimized against a single VLM or against an ensemble of VLMs, the jailbreak successfully jailbreaks the attacked VLM(s), but exhibits little-to-no transfer to any other VLMs; transfer is not affected by whether the attacked and target VLMs possess matching vision backbones or language models, whether the language model underwent instruction-following and/or safety-alignment training, or many other factors.
Only two settings display partially successful transfer: between identically-pretrained and identically-initialized VLMs with slightly different VLM training data, and between different training checkpoints of a single VLM.
Leveraging these results, we then demonstrate that transfer can be significantly improved against a specific target VLM by attacking larger ensembles of "highly-similar" VLMs.
These results stand in stark contrast to existing evidence of universal and transferable text jailbreaks against language models and transferable adversarial attacks against image classifiers, suggesting that VLMs may be more robust to gradient-based transfer attacks. Rylan Schaeffer, Dan Valentine, Luke Bailey, James Chua, Cristóbal Eyzaguirre, Zane Durante, Joe Benton, Brando Miranda, Henry Sleight, Tony T. Wang 0001, Rajashree Agrawal, Mrinank Sharma, Scott Emmons, Oluwasanmi Koyejo, Ethan Perez |
ICLR | 3 |
| 2024 | Tensor Trust: Interpretable Prompt Injection Attacks from an Online GameabstractWhile Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly being used in real-world applications, they remain vulnerable to *prompt injection attacks*: malicious third party prompts that subvert the intent of the system designer. To help researchers study this problem, we present a dataset of over 563,000 prompt injection attacks and 118,000 prompt-based "defenses" against prompt injection, all created by players of an online game called Tensor Trust. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first dataset that includes both human-generated attacks and defenses for instruction-following LLMs. The attacks in our dataset have easily interpretable structure, and shed light on the weaknesses of LLMs. We also use the dataset to create a benchmark for resistance to two types of prompt injection, which we refer to as *prompt extraction* and *prompt hijacking*. Our benchmark results show that many models are vulnerable to the attack strategies in the Tensor Trust dataset. Furthermore, we show that some attack strategies from the dataset generalize to deployed LLM-based applications, even though they have a very different set of constraints to the game. We release data and code at [tensortrust.ai/paper](https://tensortrust.ai/paper) Sam Toyer, Olivia Watkins, Ethan Mendes, Justin Svegliato, Luke Bailey, Tiffany Wang, Isaac Ong, Karim Elmaaroufi, Pieter Abbeel, Trevor Darrell, Alan Ritter, Stuart Russell 0001 |
ICLR | 5 |
| 2024 | Image Hijacks: Adversarial Images can Control Generative Models at RuntimeabstractAre foundation models secure against malicious actors? In this work, we focus on the image input to a vision-language model (VLM). We discover image hijacks, adversarial images that control the behaviour of VLMs at inference time, and introduce the general Behaviour Matching algorithm for training image hijacks. From this, we derive the Prompt Matching method, allowing us to train hijacks matching the behaviour of an arbitrary user-defined text prompt (e.g. ’the Eiffel Tower is now located in Rome’) using a generic, off-the-shelf dataset unrelated to our choice of prompt. We use Behaviour matching to craft hijacks for four types of attack: forcing VLMs to generate outputs of the adversary’s choice, leak information from their context window, override their safety training, and believe false statements. We study these attacks against LLaVA, a state-of-the-art VLM based on CLIP and LLaMA-2, and find that all attack types achieve a success rate of over 80%. Moreover, our attacks are automated and require only small image perturbations. Luke Bailey, Euan Ong, Stuart Russell 0001, Scott Emmons |
ICML | 1 |
| 2022 | CoopMC: Algorithm-Architecture Co-Optimization for Markov Chain Monte Carlo AcceleratorsabstractBayesian machine learning is useful for applications that may make high-risk decisions with limited, noisy, or unlabeled data, as it provides great data efficiency and uncertainty estimation. Building on previous efforts, this work presents CoopMC, an algorithm-architecture co-optimization for developing more efficient MCMC-based Bayesian inference accelerators. CoopMC utilizes dynamic normalization (DyNorm), LUT-based exponential kernels (TableExp), and log-domain kernel fusion (LogFusion) to reduce computational precision and shrink ALU area by 7.5× without noticeable reduction in model performance. Also, a Tree-based Gibbs sampler (TreeSampler) improves hardware runtime from $\mathcal{O}$(N) to $\mathcal{O}$(log(N)), an 8.7× speedup, and yields 1.9× better area efficiency than the existing state-of-the-art Gibbs sampling architecture. These methods have been tested on 10 diverse workloads using 3 different types of Bayesian models, demonstrating applicability to many Bayesian algorithms. In an end-to-end case study, these optimizations achieve a 33% logic area reduction, 62% power reduction, and 1.53× speedup over previous state-of-the-art end-to-end MCMC accelerators. Yuji Chai, Glenn G. Ko, Wei-Te Mark Ting, Luke Bailey, David Brooks 0001, Gu-Yeon Wei |
HPCA | 4 |