arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv subjects

Xiang Fang

Publications and source records attributed to Xiang Fang.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Forbid Your Attention: Fooling Multimodal Large Language Models by Selectively Removing Intrinsic Focus in Spectral Domain

Multimodal large language models (MLLMs) have extended the capability of large language models (LLMs) to process more contextual multimodal information, showing remarkable progress in diverse realistic multimodal applications. Despite their strong perception and reasoning abilities, recent studies reveal that MLLMs remain highly vulnerable to adversarial inputs, especially those targeting visual components. However, existing attacks mainly focus on global perturbations, lacking an understanding of how MLLMs internally interpret visual structures. In this paper, we make the attempt to investigate the intrinsic focus of MLLMs in the frequency domain and discover that their predictions are particularly sensitive to phase information, which encodes essential structural and semantic cues. Based on this observation, we propose a novel phase-aware adversarial attack framework that explicitly restricts adversarial perturbations to structure-relevant phase regions to suppress the MLLMs' focus for effective and imperceptible attacks. To further amplify the structural influence, we also introduce an auxiliary adversarial prompt learning module to guide multimodal misalignment around phase-sensitive regions, misleading the MLLM's attention toward targeted structural patterns. Extensive experiments on multiple representative MLLM models and datasets demonstrate the superior effectiveness of our method compared to existing attacks.

cs.CV

Beyond Parallel Blindness: Information Floors and Model Gaps in Block Drafting

Block drafters propose several tokens in one forward pass, before earlier target tokens are realised. Their rejection mixes two losses: missing within-block path information and imperfect modelling of observable information. Accepted length cannot distinguish them. We separate the two with an information floor, the minimum expected rejection at a specified conditioning order; rejection above this floor is the model gap. Estimating both from target rollouts across four domains, four open-weight targets, and a frontier API target yields three findings. First, the all-parallel floor reaches $0.286$ at the final slot on Qwen3-4B, limiting even the best proposal to $71\%$ per-slot acceptance. Second, one realised token removes $86$--$100\%$ of this floor, a locality also recovered by an independent mutual-information analysis. Third, current drafters remain far above their floors: the final-slot model gap accounts for $43$--$64\%$ of DFlash rejection and $85$--$92\%$ of DSpark's oracle-conditioned rejection. These findings separate the value of short-range conditioning from proposal quality.

cs.LG