Zexin Li
Publications
MoEGen: Mixture-of-Experts for Instance-Adaptive LoRA Generation
Parameter-efficient fine-tuning (PEFT) enables efficient adaptation of large language models, but existing MoE-based PEFT methods typically improve capacity by storing multiple full LoRA experts, causing adapter storage to grow linearly with the number of experts and restricting adaptation to a fixed expert pool. We ask whether MoE-based PEFT can produce instance-specific adaptations without explicitly storing a separate LoRA module for each expert. To address this gap, we propose MoEGen, an adaptation framework that shifts MoE-based PEFT from expert selection to expert-conditioned parameter generation. Instead of storing each expert as a full LoRA adapter, MoEGen represents each expert as a small learnable vector, termed an expert code. It routes each input over these vectors and uses their weighted combination to condition a lightweight hypernetwork that generates input-specific low-rank updates. This design decouples expert capacity from adapter storage while enabling instance-conditioned adaptation. Experiments on eight commonsense reasoning benchmarks show consistent improvements over strong static and MoE-based PEFT baselines across three backbones. MoEGen also performs strongly in joint medical and legal-domain adaptation.
When LLM Defenses Backfire: Characterizing Safety, Performance, and Cost Trade-offs
Jailbreak defenses are essential for protecting large language models (LLMs), but they can also introduce secondary costs that weaken model utility. We present a systematic study of these defense trade-offs along three dimensions: performance impact, over-refusal on benign inputs, and inference cost. Rather than treating defenses as a single class, we organize them by operational strategy and examine how different strategies correlate with different side-effect profiles. Across state-of-the-art defense methods, widely used benchmark datasets, and representative open-source LLMs, we find that defenses rarely improve downstream capability, but instead vary in how they trade safety gains against usability and efficiency. In particular, rule-based defenses best preserve task performance, highly conservative self-reflective defenses often increase over-refusal, and multi-round defenses incur the largest runtime overhead. These results provide both a benchmark for evaluating defense side effects and practical guidance for selecting defenses under deployment constraints.