Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Erik Miehling

dblp:99/10766 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
5ranked-venue papers
3as first author
3since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0003-0533-8329ORCID · reported

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 4 · 2 first-author · 3 since 2021Security and privacy · 1 · 1 first-author

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
3 papers
Language models and text generation · 44% Trustworthy machine learning · 37% Reinforcement learning · 19%
Network and information security
2 papers
Network security · 83% Privacy and data protection · 17%
Databases, data mining, and information retrieval
1 paper
Recommender systems · 100%

Topics — the 15 heaviest of 15, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › model steering › language model steering
activation steering
0.912025
Programming Refusal with Conditional Activation Steering · ICLR 2025
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation
controllable text generation
0.912025
Programming Refusal with Conditional Activation Steering · ICLR 2025
Natural language and speech › Language models and text generation › large language model safety
refusal behavior
0.912025
Programming Refusal with Conditional Activation Steering · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
robustness
0.912025
Programming Refusal with Conditional Activation Steering · ICLR 2025
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning › fairness › fairness criteria
disparate impact
0.712023
Cookie Consent Has Disparate Impact on Estimation Accuracy · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
fairness
0.712023
Cookie Consent Has Disparate Impact on Estimation Accuracy · NeurIPS 2023
Recommender systems › trustworthy recommendation
privacy-preserving recommendation
0.712023
Cookie Consent Has Disparate Impact on Estimation Accuracy · NeurIPS 2023
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › imitation learning
inverse reinforcement learning
0.412019
Non-Cooperative Inverse Reinforcement Learning · NeurIPS 2019
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › multi-agent reinforcement learning
markov games
0.412019
Non-Cooperative Inverse Reinforcement Learning · NeurIPS 2019
Machine learning › Reinforcement learning › multi-agent reinforcement learning › markov games
zero-sum markov game
0.412019
Non-Cooperative Inverse Reinforcement Learning · NeurIPS 2019
Network security › attack modeling
attack graph analysis
0.312018
A POMDP Approach to the Dynamic Defense of Large-Scale Cyber Networks · IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 2018
Network security
dynamic defense
0.312018
A POMDP Approach to the Dynamic Defense of Large-Scale Cyber Networks · IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 2018
Network security › intrusion detection and prevention
intrusion detection
0.312018
A POMDP Approach to the Dynamic Defense of Large-Scale Cyber Networks · IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 2018
Privacy and data protection › privacy compliance › consent
user consent
0.212023
Cookie Consent Has Disparate Impact on Estimation Accuracy · NeurIPS 2023
Algorithmic game theory and mechanism design
equilibrium computation
0.112019
Non-Cooperative Inverse Reinforcement Learning · NeurIPS 2019

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

simulation · 2.0activation steering · 0.9recursive decomposition · 0.8dual game · 0.8partially observable markov decision process · 0.3belief tracking · 0.3attack graph · 0.3
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Programming Refusal with Conditional Activation Steering
abstract
LLMs have shown remarkable capabilities, but precisely controlling their response behavior remains challenging. Existing activation steering methods alter LLM behavior indiscriminately, limiting their practical applicability in settings where selective responses are essential, such as content moderation or domain-specific assistants. In this paper, we propose Conditional Activation Steering (CAST), which analyzes LLM activation patterns during inference to selectively apply or withhold activation steering based on the input context. Our method is based on the observation that different categories of prompts activate distinct patterns in the model's hidden states. Using CAST, one can systematically control LLM behavior with rules like "if input is about hate speech or adult content, then refuse" or "if input is not about legal advice, then refuse." This allows for selective modification of responses to specific content while maintaining normal responses to other content, all without requiring weight optimization. We release an open-source implementation of our framework.
Bruce W. Lee, Inkit Padhi, Karthikeyan Natesan Ramamurthy, Erik Miehling, Pierre L. Dognin, Manish Nagireddy, Amit Dhurandhar
ICLR4
2025 Evaluating the Prompt Steerability of Large Language Models
abstract
Erik Miehling, Michael Desmond, Karthikeyan Natesan Ramamurthy, Elizabeth M. Daly, Kush R. Varshney, Eitan Farchi, Pierre Dognin, Jesus Rios, Djallel Bouneffouf, Miao Liu, Prasanna Sattigeri. Proceedings of the 2025 Conference of the Nations of the Americas Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (Volume 1: Long Papers). 2025.
Erik Miehling, Michael Desmond, Karthikeyan Natesan Ramamurthy, Elizabeth Daly, Kush R. Varshney, Eitan Farchi, Pierre L. Dognin, Jesus Rios, Djallel Bouneffouf 0001, Miao Liu 0001, Prasanna Sattigeri
NAACL (Long Papers)1
2023 Cookie Consent Has Disparate Impact on Estimation Accuracy
abstract
Cookies are designed to enable more accurate identification and tracking of user behavior, in turn allowing for more personalized ads and better performing ad campaigns. Given the additional information that is recorded, questions related to privacy and fairness naturally arise. How does a user's consent decision influence how much the system can learn about their demographic and tastes? Is the impact of a user's consent decision on the recommender system's ability to learn about their latent attributes uniform across demographics? We investigate these questions in the context of an engagement-driven recommender system using simulation. We empirically demonstrate that when consent rates exhibit demographic-dependence, user consent has a disparate impact on the recommender agent's ability to estimate users' latent attributes. In particular, we find that when consent rates are demographic-dependent, a user disagreeing to share their cookie may counter-intuitively cause the recommender agent to know more about the user than if the user agreed to share their cookie. Furthermore, the gap in base consent rates across demographics serves as an amplifier: users from the lower consent rate demographic who agree to cookie sharing generally experience higher estimation errors than the same users from the higher consent rate demographic, and conversely for users who choose to disagree to cookie sharing, with these differences increasing in consent rate gap. We discuss the need for new notions of fairness that encourage consistency between a user's privacy decisions and the system's ability to estimate their latent attributes.
Erik Miehling, Rahul Nair 0004, Elizabeth Daly, Karthikeyan Natesan Ramamurthy, Robert Redmond
NeurIPS1
2019 Non-Cooperative Inverse Reinforcement Learning
abstract
Making decisions in the presence of a strategic opponent requires one to take into account the opponent’s ability to actively mask its intended objective. To describe such strategic situations, we introduce the non-cooperative inverse reinforcement learning (N-CIRL) formalism. The N-CIRL formalism consists of two agents with completely misaligned objectives, where only one of the agents knows the true objective function. Formally, we model the N-CIRL formalism as a zero-sum Markov game with one-sided incomplete information. Through interacting with the more informed player, the less informed player attempts to both infer and optimize the true objective function. As a result of the one-sided incomplete information, the multi-stage game can be decomposed into a sequence of single- stage games expressed by a recursive formula. Solving this recursive formula yields the value of the N-CIRL game and the more informed player’s equilibrium strategy. Another recursive formula, constructed by forming an auxiliary game, termed the dual game, yields the less informed player’s strategy. Building upon these two recursive formulas, we develop a computationally tractable algorithm to approximately solve for the equilibrium strategies. Finally, we demonstrate the benefits of our N-CIRL formalism over the existing multi-agent IRL formalism via extensive numerical simulation in a novel cyber security setting.
Xiangyuan Zhang, Kaiqing Zhang, Erik Miehling, Tamer Basar
NeurIPS3
2018 A POMDP Approach to the Dynamic Defense of Large-Scale Cyber Networks
abstract
We investigate the problem of optimally mitigating the progression of an adversary through a network in real-time, decreasing the probability of it reaching its goal(s), while minimizing the negative impact to availability. Our model is based on a type of attack graph, termed a condition dependency graph, which models the dependencies between security conditions (attacker capabilities) and exploits. By embedding a state space on the graph, we are able to quantify the progression of the attacker over time. The defender is able to interfere with the attacker's progression by blocking some exploits from being carried out. The nature of the attacker's progression through the network is dictated by its private strategy, which depends on the defender's action. The defender's uncertainty of the attacker's true strategy is modeled by considering a finite collection of attacker types. Using noisy security alerts (exhibiting both missed detections and false alarms), the defender maintains a belief representing the joint distribution over the attacker's current capabilities and true strategy. The resulting problem of determining how to optimally interfere with the attacker's progression is cast as a partially observable Markov decision process. To deal with the large state space, we develop a scalable online defense algorithm for tracking beliefs and prescribing defense actions over time. Using the context provided by the state, we are able to efficiently process security alerts even in the presence of a high rate of false alarms. The behavior of the computed defense policy is demonstrated on an illustrative example.
Erik Miehling, Mohammad Rasouli 0001, Demosthenis Teneketzis
IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur.1