Papers by Yu-Neng Chuang
Taylor Unswift: Secured Weight Release for Large Language Models via Taylor Expansion (2024.emnlp-main)
Copied to clipboard
Guanchu Wang, Yu-Neng Chuang, Ruixiang Tang, Shaochen Zhong, Jiayi Yuan, Hongye Jin, Zirui Liu, Vipin Chaudhary, Shuai Xu, James Caverlee, Xia Hu
| Challenge: | Existing mechanisms compromise ownership rights or raise data privacy concerns . existing mechanisms compromise security of released large language models . |
| Approach: | They propose a TaylorMLP to preserve the ownership of large language models by transforming the weights of LLMs into Taylor-series parameters instead of releasing original weights . |
| Outcome: | The proposed model preserves ownership of large language models and prevents their abuse by adjusting the generation speed and causing low-speed token generation. |
Self-Ensemble: Mitigating Confidence Distortion for Large Language Models (2025.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Large Language Models exhibit a confidence distortion problem on multichoice question-answering . Self-Ensemble solves this problem by splitting the choices into several groups . |
| Approach: | They propose a method that splits LLM choices into several groups and ensembles them to reach a final decision. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method outperforms standard inference and baseline methods on MCQA. |
FaithLM: Towards Faithful Explanations for Large Language Models (2026.eacl-long)
Copied to clipboard
Yu-Neng Chuang, Guanchu Wang, Chia-Yuan Chang, Ruixiang Tang, Shaochen Zhong, Fan Yang, Andrew Wen, Mengnan Du, Xuanting Cai, Vladimir Braverman, Xia Hu
| Challenge: | Large language models (LLMs) produce natural language explanations, but they lack faithfulness and do not reflect the evidence the model uses to decide. |
| Approach: | They propose a model-agnostic framework that evaluates and improves the faithfulness of LLM explanations without token masking or task-specific heuristics. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework improves faithfulness of large language models without masking or heuristics. |
KV Cache Compression, But What Must We Give in Return? A Comprehensive Benchmark of Long Context Capable Approaches (2024.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
Jiayi Yuan, Hongyi Liu, Shaochen Zhong, Yu-Neng Chuang, Songchen Li, Guanchu Wang, Duy Le, Hongye Jin, Vipin Chaudhary, Zhaozhuo Xu, Zirui Liu, Xia Hu
| Challenge: | Long context capability is a crucial competency for large language models as it mitigates the human struggle to digest long-form texts. |
| Approach: | They propose to evaluate 10+ state-of-the-art approaches for long context-capable LLMs. |
| Outcome: | The proposed methods are compared against 10+ state-of-the-art approaches across seven categories of long context tasks. |
Learning to Compress Prompt in Natural Language Formats (2024.naacl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing work rely on compressing long contexts into soft prompts, but soft prompt compression encounters limitations in transferability . natural language (NL) prompts are incompatible with back-propagation, and NL prompts lack flexibility in imposing length constraints. |
| Approach: | They propose a framework that compresses long prompts into NL formatted Capsule Prompts. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework reduces 81.4% of the original length, decreases inference latency up to 4.5x, and saves 80.1% of budget overheads while providing transferability across diverse LLMs and different datasets. |
A Decoupled Multi-Agent Framework for Complex Text Style Transfer (2025.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing models for text style transfer struggle with complex styles . existing models perform well on simple styles like sentiment and formality . |
| Approach: | They propose a multi-agent self-check framework that includes a large language model as a planner for disentangling subtasks and expert agents for executing the subtask. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework significantly improves style strength and content preservation on simple and complex style datasets. |
DHP Benchmark: Are LLMs Good NLG Evaluators? (2025.findings-naacl)
Copied to clipboard
Yicheng Wang, Jiayi Yuan, Yu-Neng Chuang, Zhuoer Wang, Yingchi Liu, Mark Cusick, Param Kulkarni, Zhengping Ji, Yasser Ibrahim, Xia Hu
| Challenge: | Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly serving as evaluators in Natural Language Generation (NLG) tasks. |
| Approach: | They propose a framework that measures the discernment of Large Language Models (LLMs) across diverse NLG tasks. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework provides quantitative discernment scores for LLMs across four NLG tasks. |
LoRATK: LoRA Once, Backdoor Everywhere in the Share-and-Play Ecosystem (2025.findings-emnlp)
Copied to clipboard
Hongyi Liu, Shaochen Zhong, Xintong Sun, Minghao Tian, Mohsen Hariri, Zirui Liu, Ruixiang Tang, Zhimeng Jiang, Jiayi Yuan, Yu-Neng Chuang, Li Li, Soo-Hyun Choi, Rui Chen, Vipin Chaudhary, Xia Hu
| Challenge: | distributing LLMs without a proven track record like ‘meta-llama‘ or ‘qwen‘ rarely gains community traction. |
| Approach: | They propose a simple, efficient, yet specific recipe for a backdoor LoRA to be injected into task-enhancing LoRAs and examine the mechanisms of such infections. |
| Outcome: | The proposed model allows attackers to scale the distribution of compromised LoRAs with minimal effort by leveraging the rich pool of shared LoRA assets. |
Quantized Can Still Be Calibrated: A Unified Framework to Calibration in Quantized Large Language Models (2025.acl-long)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Existing methods to quantify uncertainty of large language models (LLMs) but their influence on uncertainty calibration remains unexplored. |
| Approach: | They propose an analytic method to estimate the upper bound of calibration error (UBCE) for quantized LLMs and propose a method to recover calibration errors through soft-prompt tuning. |
| Outcome: | The proposed method improves the calibration accuracy of quantized models on multiple datasets and LLMs. |
Secure Your Model: An Effective Key Prompt Protection Mechanism for Large Language Models (2024.findings-naacl)
Copied to clipboard
| Challenge: | Recent years have seen an unprecedented surge in the development and application of large language models (LLMs) however, the development of LLMs is a complex endeavor, requiring substantial investments in terms of financial and computational resources. |
| Approach: | They propose a mechanism wherein a unique key prompt is embedded within the LLM to protect it from unauthorized access and potential theft. |
| Outcome: | The proposed protection can protect the model without significantly impacting its original function. |
AutoL2S: Auto Long-Short Reasoning for Efficient Large Language Models (2026.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
Feng Luo, Yu-Neng Chuang, Guanchu Wang, Hoang Anh Duy Le, Shaochen Zhong, Hongyi Liu, Jiayi Yuan, Yang Sui, Vladimir Braverman, Vipin Chaudhary, Xia Hu
| Challenge: | Existing approaches to distilling large language models (LLMs) are inefficient and generate excessively long chain-of-thought reasoning even for inputs that admit concise solutions. |
| Approach: | They propose a distillation framework that empowers non-reasoning LLMs to think only when necessary. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework reduces reasoning length up to 71% with minimal accuracy loss while preserving accuracy. |
ReasonerRank: Redefining Language Model Evaluation with Ground-Truth-Free Ranking Frameworks (2025.findings-acl)
Copied to clipboard
Jiamu Zhang, Jiayi Yuan, Andrew Wen, Hoang Anh Duy Le, Yu-Neng Chuang, Soo-Hyun Choi, Rui Chen, Xia Hu
| Challenge: | Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly adopted across real-world applications . traditional evaluations rely on expensive, domain-specific ground-truth labels . obtaining labeled data is expensive, time-consuming, and often requires domain expertise . |
| Approach: | They propose a ground-truth-free evaluation framework focused on reasoning consistency and instruction following. |
| Outcome: | The proposed framework outperforms existing label-free methods, including majority voting, triplet ranking, and peer-review approaches. |