Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Shei Pern Chua
dblp:412/5634
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2026
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-author · 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
1 paper |
Security and privacy of machine learning · 100% | |
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Knowledge representation and reasoning · 100% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Security and privacy of machine learning
red teaming |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Between a Rock and a Hard Place: The Tension Between Ethical Reasoning and Safety Alignment in LLMs · ACL (1) 2026 |
Security and privacy of machine learning › large language model alignment
safety alignment |
1.0 | 1 | 2026 | Between a Rock and a Hard Place: The Tension Between Ethical Reasoning and Safety Alignment in LLMs · ACL (1) 2026 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning › normative reasoning
moral reasoning |
0.3 | 1 | 2026 | Between a Rock and a Hard Place: The Tension Between Ethical Reasoning and Safety Alignment in LLMs · ACL (1) 2026 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
multi-turn red-teaming · 2.0LoRA · 2.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | Between a Rock and a Hard Place: The Tension Between Ethical Reasoning and Safety Alignment in LLMsabstractWarning: This paper contains potentially offensive and harmful text.Large Language Model safety alignment predominantly operates on a binary assumption that requests are either safe or unsafe.This classification proves insufficient when models encounter ethical dilemmas, where the capacity to reason through moral trade-offs creates a distinct attack surface.We formalize this vulnerability through TRIAL, a multi-turn red-teaming methodology that embeds harmful requests within ethical framings.TRIAL achieves high attack success rates across most tested models by systematically exploiting the model's ethical reasoning capabilities to frame harmful actions as morally necessary compromises.Building on these insights, we introduce ERR (Ethical Reasoning Robustness), a defense framework that distinguishes between instrumental responses that enable harmful outcomes and explanatory responses that analyze ethical frameworks without endorsing harmful acts.ERR employs a Layer-Stratified Harm-Gated LoRA architecture, achieving robust defense against reasoning-based attacks while preserving model utility. Shei Pern Chua, Zhen Leng Thai, Kai Jun Teh, Qibing Ren |
ACL (1) | 1 |