Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Yuguang Zhou
dblp:197/3727
· DBLP profile ↗
4ranked-venue papers
1as first author
4since 2021 · last 2025
—ORCID · conflict
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 1 first-author · 2 since 2021Security and privacy · 2 · 2 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 · 79% Privacy and data protection · 21% | |
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Image recognition and object detection · 100% |
Topics — the 7 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Security and privacy of machine learning › adversarial attack
backdoor attack |
1.7 | 2 | 2025 | Compromising LLM Driven Embodied Agents With Contextual Backdoor Attacks · IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 2025 Pre-trained Trojan Attacks for Visual Recognition · Int. J. Comput. Vis. 2025 |
Computer vision › Image recognition and object detection
visual recognition |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Pre-trained Trojan Attacks for Visual Recognition · Int. J. Comput. Vis. 2025 |
Security and privacy of machine learning
adversarial attack |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Compromising LLM Driven Embodied Agents With Contextual Backdoor Attacks · IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 2025 |
Privacy and data protection
collaborative inference |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Prompt Inversion Attack Against Collaborative Inference of Large Language Models · SP 2025 |
Security and privacy of machine learning
large language model security |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Compromising LLM Driven Embodied Agents With Contextual Backdoor Attacks · IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 2025 |
Security and privacy of machine learning
privacy attack |
0.9 | 1 | 2025 | Prompt Inversion Attack Against Collaborative Inference of Large Language Models · SP 2025 |
Privacy and data protection › information leakage
prompt recovery |
0.3 | 1 | 2025 | Prompt Inversion Attack Against Collaborative Inference of Large Language Models · SP 2025 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
semantic speculation · 0.9embedding optimization · 0.9contextual backdoor attack · 0.9activation calibration · 0.9
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Prompt Inversion Attack Against Collaborative Inference of Large Language ModelsabstractLarge language models (LLMs) have been widely applied for their remarkable capability of content generation. However, the practical use of open-source LLMs is hindered by high resource requirements, making deployment expensive and limiting widespread development. The collaborative inference is a promising solution for this problem, in which users collaborate by each hosting a subset of layers and transmitting intermediate activation. Many companies are building collaborative inference platforms to reduce LLM serving costs, leveraging users' underutilized GPUs. Despite widespread interest in collaborative inference within academia and industry, the privacy risks associated with LLM collaborative inference have not been well studied. This is largely because of the challenge posed by inverting LLM activation due to its strong non-linearity. In this paper, to validate the severity of privacy threats in LLM collaborative inference, we introduce the concept of prompt inversion attack (PIA), where a malicious participant intends to recover the input prompt through the activation transmitted by its previous participant. Specifically, we design a two-stage method to execute this attack. In the first stage, we optimize the input embedding with a constraint term derived from the LLM's embedding matrix to enforce the optimized embedding to be close to the ground truth. In the second stage, we accurately recover discrete tokens by incorporating activation calibration and semantic speculation. Extensive experiments show that our PIA method substantially outperforms existing baselines. For example, our method achieves an 88.4% token accuracy on the Skytrax dataset with the Llama-65B model when inverting the maximum number of transformer layers, while the best baseline method only achieves 22.8% accuracy. The results verify the effectiveness of our PIA attack and highlights its practical threat to LLM collaborative inference systems. Wenjie Qu 0001, Yuguang Zhou, Tingsong Xiao, Binhang Yuan, Yiming Li 0004, Jiaheng Zhang |
SP | 2 |
| 2025 | Pre-trained Trojan Attacks for Visual Recognition
Aishan Liu, Xianglong Liu 0001, Xinwei Zhang 0010, Yisong Xiao, Yuguang Zhou, Siyuan Liang 0004, Jiakai Wang, Xiaochun Cao, Dacheng Tao |
Int. J. Comput. Vis. | 5 |
| 2025 | Compromising LLM Driven Embodied Agents With Contextual Backdoor Attacks
Aishan Liu, Yuguang Zhou, Xianglong Liu 0001, Tianyuan Zhang 0004, Siyuan Liang 0004, Jiakai Wang, Yanjun Pu, Tianlin Li, Wenbo Zhou 0004, Qing Guo 0005, Dacheng Tao |
IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. | 2 |
| 2021 | Random Neural Graph Generation with Structure Evolution
Yuguang Zhou, Tao Wan 0001, Zengchang Qin |
ICONIP (2) | 1 |