Feng Zhang
Publications
GhostCite: A Large-Scale Analysis of Citation Validity in the Age of Large Language Models
Citations provide the basis for trusting scientific claims; when they are invalid or fabricated, this trust collapses. With the advent of Large Language Models (LLMs), this risk has intensified: LLMs are increasingly used for academic writing, yet their tendency to fabricate citations (``ghost citations'') poses a systemic threat to citation validity. To quantify this threat and inform mitigation, we develop CiteVerifier, an open-source framework for large-scale citation verification, and conduct the first comprehensive study of citation validity in the LLM era through three experiments built on it. We benchmark 13 state-of-the-art LLMs on citation generation across 40 research domains, finding that all models hallucinate citations at rates from 14.23\% to 94.93\%, with significant variation across research domains. Moreover, we analyze 2.2 million citations from 56,381 papers published at top-tier AI/ML and Security venues (2020--2025), confirming that 1.07\% of papers contain invalid or fabricated citations (604 papers), with an 80.9\% increase in 2025 alone. Furthermore, we survey 97 researchers and analyze 94 valid responses after removing 3 conflicting samples, revealing a critical ``verification gap'': 41.5\% of researchers copy-paste BibTeX without checking and 44.4\% choose no-action responses when encountering suspicious references; meanwhile, 76.7\% of reviewers do not thoroughly check references and 80.0\% never suspect fake citations. Our findings reveal an accelerating crisis where unreliable AI tools, combined with inadequate human verification by researchers and insufficient peer review scrutiny, enable fabricated citations to contaminate the scientific record. We propose interventions for researchers, venues, and tool developers to protect citation integrity.
A Semantic Decoupling-Based Two-Stage Rainy-Day Attack for Revealing Weather Robustness Deficiencies in Vision-Language Models
Vision-Language Models (VLMs) are trained on image-text pairs collected under canonical visual conditions and achieve strong performance on multimodal tasks. However, their robustness to real-world weather conditions, and the stability of cross-modal semantic alignment under such structured perturbations, remain insufficiently studied. In this paper, we focus on rainy scenarios and introduce the first adversarial framework that exploits realistic weather to attack VLMs, using a two-stage, parameterized perturbation model based on semantic decoupling to analyze rain-induced shifts in decision-making. In Stage 1, we model the global effects of rainfall by applying a low-dimensional global modulation to condition the embedding space and gradually weaken the original semantic decision boundaries. In Stage 2, we introduce structured rain variations by explicitly modeling multi-scale raindrop appearance and rainfall-induced illumination changes, and optimize the resulting non-differentiable weather space to induce stable semantic shifts. Operating in a non-pixel parameter space, our framework generates perturbations that are both physically grounded and interpretable. Experiments across multiple tasks show that even physically plausible, highly constrained weather perturbations can induce substantial semantic misalignment in mainstream VLMs, posing potential safety and reliability risks in real-world deployment. Ablations further confirm that illumination modeling and multi-scale raindrop structures are key drivers of these semantic shifts.