Pingbang Hu ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ผ (@PingbangHu) header
Pingbang Hu ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ผ (@PingbangHu) profile picture

I work on, with, and for data. Ph.D. candidate @UofIllinois. Fellows @AnthropicAI. Interns @ SIG @amazon @jouhouken. Alumni @Umich @SJTU1896.

Earth
Joined July 2021
Photo by Pingbang Hu ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ผ (@PingbangHu)Photo by Pingbang Hu ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ผ (@PingbangHu)Photo by Pingbang Hu ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ผ (@PingbangHu)Photo by Pingbang Hu ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ผ (@PingbangHu)Photo by Pingbang Hu ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ผ (@PingbangHu)Photo by Pingbang Hu ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ผ (@PingbangHu)Photo by Pingbang Hu ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ผ (@PingbangHu)Photo by Pingbang Hu ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ผ (@PingbangHu)Photo by Pingbang Hu ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ผ (@PingbangHu)
A hot take AI-generated papers are not AI slops by their own: they actually tend to be more honest in findings/experimental settings/results than most human researchers. They are only slops if the fundamental idea is bs and human researcher try to hide it by iterating with AI.
4
6
1
74
4,891
Just add the 4-th column with non-thinking mode and we will see lol
> Replicated weight-space programming on my own GPUs today. > Opus 5.5 edited 2 neuron output columns in layer 29 of Qwen3.5-4B. That is 0.00012% of the weights. No gradients, no training loop. > Held-out 150 math problems: > repetition loops 22-25 โ†’ 0 > correct 59 โ†’ 92-94 > random-patch control: 47-57 > 27 min, $1.03 of API, zero human intervention.
456
interp ppl joke on u who will think opening up a black box model improve capability ๐Ÿ˜ญ joke aside this is very interesting...
We asked GPT-6 Astra to edit Qwen3.5-0.8B weights to improve math. It directly changed only 0.016% of weights, fixing 0.8B's reasoning loops & improving math up to 6x and even instruction following 3x, without gradients or training. We call this Weight-Space Programming: frontier LLMs can now natively read/write neural network weights! ๐Ÿงต Blog: rikiyat.github.io/blog/weighโ€ฆ
3
527
I finally gave @diabrowser a try after seeing this. In 10 mins I want to strangle myself to death 3 times. why doing this to us @browsercompany
Turns out you don't need to make a new browser when your favourite one doesn't have a feature. You can just patch it in ๐Ÿ‘
6
851
Pingbang Hu ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ผ retweeted
Agentic Backdoors via Pretraining Poisoning Poisoning just 0.1% of pretraining data can embed remote code execution backdoors into agents that persist through clean post-training, with attack success scaling up to about 92% in a 4B-parameter model. arxivb.org/abs/2610.37741
1
8
50
1,823
Pingbang Hu ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ผ retweeted
Poisoning just 0.1% of pretraining data can plant a remote-code-execution backdoor in an AI agent, and it survives a fully clean SFT โ†’ DPO โ†’ RL pipeline. New Anthropic paper, โ€œAgentic Backdoors via Pretraining Poisoning,โ€ shows this end to end for the first time. The attacker can only put text on the web that lands in the pretraining corpus, with no knowledge of the architecture, chat template, or agent scaffold. The authors pretrain Qwen3-architecture models (0.6B / 1.7B / 4B) from scratch, then post-train them into CLI agents on clean data. When triggered, the agent runs a command that downloads and executes the attacker's script, which the attacker can swap at any time. They have two new ideas: (1) Declaration-based poison: instead of fake chat transcripts, ordinary documents (commit messages, runbooks) that simply state โ€œwhen you see X, run Y.โ€ It plants a belief rather than a response template, with no fixed format to filter on. (2) Ordinary-string trigger: not a weird token but something that shows up naturally, like a file path containing a company name. The victim's own request supplies it, so the attacker doesn't need to inject anything after deployment. Using path trigger on a 4B agent achieves 92.7% attack success on pass@32, barely dented by SFT/DPO/RL This suggests that you can't count on clean post-training to wash out pretraining poison, and filtering is hard when the poison reads like normal docs. The practical defense is at the action layer, such as sandboxing, least privilege, and allow-lists or human sign-off for risky commands.
64
181
79
1,298
153,134
Pingbang Hu ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ผ retweeted
Interesting paper from Anthropic and colleagues on agent security. (bookmark it) Poisoning 0.1% of the pretraining data planted a remote code execution backdoor in a CLI agent. On a 4B model, the attack succeeded on roughly 92% of triggered prompts. They pretrained Qwen3 models from scratch at 0.6B, 1.7B, and 4B, then post-trained each one into an agent with a clean pipeline. The backdoor survived SFT, DPO, and RL for tool use. On clean inputs, the agent behaved normally. The trigger can be an ordinary file path in the user's own request. Success rose with model size. At a 0.0005% poison rate, about 2,500 documents in a 100B-token corpus, the trigger still fired on 1.4% of prompts in a single-seed run. The poison states its rule in plain text, which makes it harder to filter out of training data. arxiv.org/abs/2610.37741 Chat with Paper: academy.dair.ai/papers/agentโ€ฆ
66
23
12
162
14,067
Pingbang Hu ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ผ retweeted
Agentic Backdoors via Pretraining Poisoning Xinyan Hu, Pingbang Hu, Chloe Loughridge, Xuanli He, Nicholas Carlini, Matthew Jagielski, Javier Rando, Yiming Zhang arxiv.org/abs/2610.37741 [๐šŒ๐šœ.๐™ฒ๐š ๐šŒ๐šœ.๐™ฒ๐™ป ๐šŒ๐šœ.๐™ป๐™ถ]
2
1
3
175
If this encourages people touching my 5 y-o m1 macbook screen I'm going to sue Apple. Literally.
10
1,025
hilarious to see claude complains about the monitor set up by itself being too chatty.
10
610
What a crazy time...
An internal model at OpenAI has produced a claimed refutation of ETH! Russell Impagliazzo, Mohan Paturi, and I have been asked to help organize an open and independent examination of this claim. 1/4
7
883
I have been using Arc since beta. This is a generational fumble. I get it, it's the era of AI. I really get it. But abandoning a product that has (maybe not big) a group of die-hard users that will literally do anything (yes, take my money)? Like More than a year ago they stopped developing new features. I have never thought about leaving. It's this good. This is just unheardof.
We've decided to sunset Arc on December 22, 2026. That's not an easy sentence to write. We spent years building Arc and celebrating each and every release along the way: we have so much pride and love for what we made alongside the Arc community. Our priority is to deliver best-in-class security for our members. Keeping a browser secure takes constant, dedicated work that is only increasing in the age of AI. Dia was built from the ground up to meet todayโ€™s security standards, so that's where our engineering and security teams will focus moving forward. We've worked to make switching to @diabrowser as easy as possible for Arc members. Here's how: ยท Your passwords, bookmarks, extensions and history come over to Dia seamlessly. ยท Spaces, Folders, and Tab Groups are in Dia and import over with your data intact. ยท Dia now surpasses Arc benchmarks in stability, speed, and security. ยท The browser features you use in Arc are free in Dia, and the AI is optional. Thank you for using Arc, for pushing us to make it better, and for building alongside us. The team that made Arc is the same team behind Dia, and some of our most ambitious work is just ahead. We'd love for you to be there with us when it lands.
12
1,950
yea the whole system is breaking down.
2
1
1
65
14,615
Pingbang Hu ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ผ retweeted
Change your GPU count mid-run and a typical data loader changes your data order, and possibly your results. Zephon keeps every global batch identical, and now works with TorchTitan. Thanks @PyTorch for having us on the blog.
Zephonโ€™s TorchTitan integration preserves identical global batches when training resumes on a different GPU count. In our latest blogโ€™s 1B-parameter model test, training resumed from a 16-GPU checkpoint on 8, 32, and 64 GPUs, and the SHA-256 hash of every global batch matched the original run. Zephon tokenizes, packs, shuffles, and mixes data inside the training job, avoiding a preprocessed copy of the corpus. The data, tokenizer, seed, mixture, context length, and global batch size must stay unchanged when resuming. The lane count must divide evenly across data-parallel replicas, and each optimizer stepโ€™s batch must split evenly across lanes. Training losses can still differ because floating-point reduction order depends on GPU count. โœ๏ธ @datologyai @josh_wills @MaxiBoether, Ties Robroek (@datologyai) Read more: pytorch.org/blog/bringing-elโ€ฆ
6
26
1,132