Skip to content
← Back to explorer

SECA: Semantically Equivalent and Coherent Attacks for Eliciting LLM Hallucinations

Buyun Liang, Liangzu Peng, Jinqi Luo, Darshan Thaker, Kwan Ho Ryan Chan, René Vidal · Oct 5, 2025 · Citations: 0

Abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in high-risk domains. However, state-of-the-art LLMs often exhibit hallucinations, raising serious concerns about their reliability. Prior work has explored adversarial attacks to elicit hallucinations in LLMs, but these methods often rely on unrealistic prompts, either by inserting nonsensical tokens or by altering the original semantic intent. Consequently, such approaches provide limited insight into how hallucinations arise in real-world settings. In contrast, adversarial attacks in computer vision typically involve realistic modifications to input images. However, the problem of identifying realistic adversarial prompts for eliciting LLM hallucinations remains largely underexplored. To address this gap, we propose Semantically Equivalent and Coherent Attacks (SECA), which elicit hallucinations via realistic modifications to the prompt that preserve its meaning while maintaining semantic coherence. Our contributions are threefold: (i) we formulate finding realistic attacks for hallucination elicitation as a constrained optimization problem over the input prompt space under semantic equivalence and coherence constraints; (ii) we introduce a constraint-preserving zeroth-order method to effectively search for adversarial yet feasible prompts; and (iii) we demonstrate through experiments on open-ended multiple-choice question answering tasks that SECA achieves higher attack success rates while incurring almost no semantic equivalence or semantic coherence errors compared to existing methods. SECA highlights the sensitivity of both open-source and commercial gradient-inaccessible LLMs to realistic and plausible prompt variations. Code is available at https://github.com/Buyun-Liang/SECA.

HFEPX Relevance Assessment

This paper appears adjacent to HFEPX scope (human-feedback/eval), but does not show strong direct protocol evidence in metadata/abstract.

Eval-Fit Score

0/100 • Low

Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.

Human Feedback Signal

Not explicit in abstract metadata

Evaluation Signal

Weak / implicit signal

HFEPX Fit

Adjacent candidate

Human Data Lens

  • Uses human feedback: No
  • Feedback types: None
  • Rater population: Unknown
  • Unit of annotation: Unknown
  • Expertise required: Coding
  • Extraction source: Persisted extraction

Evaluation Lens

  • Evaluation modes:
  • Agentic eval: None
  • Quality controls: Not reported
  • Confidence: 0.20
  • Flags: low_signal, possible_false_positive

Protocol And Measurement Signals

Benchmarks / Datasets

No benchmark or dataset names were extracted from the available abstract.

Reported Metrics

coherence

Research Brief

Deterministic synthesis

To address this gap, we propose Semantically Equivalent and Coherent Attacks (SECA), which elicit hallucinations via realistic modifications to the prompt that preserve its meaning while maintaining semantic coherence. HFEPX protocol signal is limited in abstract-level metadata, so treat it as adjacent context. Updated from current HFEPX corpus.

Generated Mar 3, 2026, 6:46 PM · Grounded in abstract + metadata only

Key Takeaways

  • To address this gap, we propose Semantically Equivalent and Coherent Attacks (SECA), which elicit hallucinations via realistic modifications to the prompt that preserve its meaning…
  • Our contributions are threefold: (i) we formulate finding realistic attacks for hallucination elicitation as a constrained optimization problem over the input prompt space under…
  • Abstract shows limited direct human-feedback or evaluation-protocol detail; use as adjacent methodological context.

Researcher Actions

  • Treat this as method context, then pivot to protocol-specific HFEPX hubs.
  • Identify benchmark choices from full text before operationalizing conclusions.
  • Validate metric comparability (coherence).

Caveats

  • Generated from title, abstract, and extracted metadata only; full-paper implementation details are not parsed.
  • Low-signal flag detected: protocol relevance may be indirect.

Research Summary

Contribution Summary

  • To address this gap, we propose Semantically Equivalent and Coherent Attacks (SECA), which elicit hallucinations via realistic modifications to the prompt that preserve its meaning while maintaining semantic coherence.
  • Our contributions are threefold: (i) we formulate finding realistic attacks for hallucination elicitation as a constrained optimization problem over the input prompt space under semantic equivalence and coherence constraints; (ii) we…

Why It Matters For Eval

  • Abstract shows limited direct human-feedback or evaluation-protocol detail; use as adjacent methodological context.

Researcher Checklist

  • Gap: Human feedback protocol is explicit

    No explicit human feedback protocol detected.

  • Gap: Evaluation mode is explicit

    No clear evaluation mode extracted.

  • Gap: Quality control reporting appears

    No calibration/adjudication/IAA control explicitly detected.

  • Gap: Benchmark or dataset anchors are present

    No benchmark/dataset anchor extracted from abstract.

  • Pass: Metric reporting is present

    Detected: coherence

Category-Adjacent Papers (Broader Context)

These papers are nearby in arXiv category and useful for broader context, but not necessarily protocol-matched to this paper.

Need human evaluators for your AI research? Scale annotation with expert AI Trainers.