Papers › SECA: Semantically Equivalent and Coherent Attacks for Eliciting LLM Hallucinations
SECA: Semantically Equivalent and Coherent Attacks for Eliciting LLM Hallucinations
Buyun Liang, Liangzu Peng, Jinqi Luo, Darshan Thaker, Kwan Ho Ryan Chan, René Vidal
Title, abstract, authors and date from arXiv's metadata (CC0); this paper is not in the Papers with Code archive (frozen 2025-07-28).
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in high-risk domains. However, state-of-the-art LLMs often exhibit hallucinations, raising serious concerns about their reliability. Prior work has explored adversarial attacks to elicit hallucinations in LLMs, but these methods often rely on unrealistic prompts, either by inserting nonsensical tokens or by altering the original semantic intent. Consequently, such approaches provide limited insight into how hallucinations arise in real-world settings. In contrast, adversarial attacks in computer vision typically involve realistic modifications to input images. However, the problem of identifying realistic adversarial prompts for eliciting LLM hallucinations remains largely underexplored. To address this gap, we propose Semantically Equivalent and Coherent Attacks (SECA), which elicit hallucinations via realistic modifications to the prompt that preserve its meaning while maintaining semantic coherence. Our contributions are threefold: (i) we formulate finding realistic attacks for hallucination elicitation as a constrained optimization problem over the input prompt space under semantic equivalence and coherence constraints; (ii) we introduce a constraint-preserving zeroth-order method to effectively search for adversarial yet feasible prompts; and (iii) we demonstrate through experiments on open-ended multiple-choice question answering tasks that SECA achieves higher attack success rates while incurring almost no semantic equivalence or semantic coherence errors compared to existing methods. SECA highlights the sensitivity of both open-source and commercial gradient-inaccessible LLMs to realistic and plausible prompt variations. Code is available at https://github.com/Buyun-Liang/SECA.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2510.04398")
Code
Syntology Ran 8 of 11 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 3 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 2 ran · honoured contract; 1 ran · violated contract; 5 ran · our draft was wrong.
By repository: found in paper text by Syntology: 11 samples from 1 repository, 8 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
11 samples harvested; 8 ran; 2 honoured the contract we drafted; 3 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 0 of the 11 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from Buyun-Liang/SECA. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
d354dde7f3226fed · report
5043517b4a24afe0 · report
c908cca1a7b8292d · report
cf0a660abde18864 · report
b74243272d5f3d61 · report
48ba4eab96fc8312 · report
0b2fdf45cd9667d3 · report
b2bb85b015b1aa7e · report
618de0ef99077865 · report
977374326178f537 · report
418fceafa5cdb4e2 · report
Results from the paper
The Papers with Code archive ends with its 2025-07-28 snapshot. This paper's arXiv identifier, 2510.04398, was issued in October 2025, after that date, so the archive has no leaderboard rows for it.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections