An ensemble of GPT-4 and Gemini prompts, fitted to 300 hand-labeled CFPB complaints, labels scam vs. non-scam fraud with reported precision .95/recall .84 on the same training set and precision .97 on a 133-complaint sample.
Can LLMs be Scammed? A Baseline Measurement Study
1 Pith paper cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
abstract
Despite the importance of developing generative AI models that can effectively resist scams, current literature lacks a structured framework for evaluating their vulnerability to such threats. In this work, we address this gap by constructing a benchmark based on the FINRA taxonomy and systematically assessing Large Language Models' (LLMs') vulnerability to a variety of scam tactics. First, we incorporate 37 well-defined base scam scenarios reflecting the diverse scam categories identified by FINRA taxonomy, providing a focused evaluation of LLMs' scam detection capabilities. Second, we utilize representative proprietary (GPT-3.5, GPT-4) and open-source (Llama) models to analyze their performance in scam detection. Third, our research provides critical insights into which scam tactics are most effective against LLMs and how varying persona traits and persuasive techniques influence these vulnerabilities. We reveal distinct susceptibility patterns across different models and scenarios, underscoring the need for targeted enhancements in LLM design and deployment.
citation-role summary
citation-polarity summary
fields
cs.CR 1years
2024 1verdicts
CONDITIONAL 1roles
background 1polarities
unclear 1representative citing papers
citing papers explorer
-
Distinguishing Scams and Fraud with Ensemble Learning
An ensemble of GPT-4 and Gemini prompts, fitted to 300 hand-labeled CFPB complaints, labels scam vs. non-scam fraud with reported precision .95/recall .84 on the same training set and precision .97 on a 133-complaint sample.