跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

YOUR RESEARCH, IN SIGHT

让下一篇重要论文,不再错过。

覆盖计算机全学科,以 AI 为快捷入口。关注方向、作者和关键词,把发现变成持续的研究积累。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+2093新增论文
+1639其中 AI 相关
+186已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-11 13:10 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-11 13:09各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-10 13:13 — 2026-11-11 13:13(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:2026-11-11 13:10最近发现新增版本:2026-11-11 13:09库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-11 08:00

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

21,672 已收录论文18,320 AI 相关6,055 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-11 13:06(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.11266

ErosionBench: Probing Alignment Decay in Enterprise Multi-Agent Systems

Riya Bharathwaj, Akshara Prabhakar, Roshan Ram, Avni Kothari, Sarah Tan, Huan Wang, Silvio Savarese

原文摘要

As enterprises delegate consequential work to multi-agent LLM systems, benign-looking requests can escalate into unsafe actions as they propagate across sessions through poisoned shared state, long-context documents, and trusted peer messages: no single message is malicious, yet the assembled tool action is. Prior benchmarks isolate a single agent under prompt injection or score multi-agent attacks by their final output, leaving cross-session erosion of shared state out of scope. We introduce ErosionBench, an environment-grounded benchmark that executes such attacks and verifies alignment decay at the process level, scoring the realized tool call against authorized intent and provenance with deterministic contracts, not output text. Each scenario is authored as a deterministic state graph before any prose is rendered, so every state change traces to a known cause. It spans four enterprise domains and four decay mechanisms across 1,728 scenarios with matched benign controls, labeled against the OWASP Top-10 for LLM Applications, plus 198 image-based attacks, each paired with a text equivalent, so a defense must survive the same attack in either channel. Perimeter defenses suppress attacks only by over-refusing 54-92% of legitimate work, so a low attack-success rate can conceal severe over-refusal. As a reference defense, we propose a calibrated Meta-Auditor pairing synchronous state checks with asynchronous trajectory monitoring; on a family-disjoint 906-scenario held-out split it reaches 98.5% recall at a 2.9% false-positive rate. Since it monitors trajectory, not surface content, its detection is channel-invariant: the strongest auditor flags image-delivered attacks about as reliably as their text equivalents (recall gap $\leq$2 points per model). Across GPT, Gemini, and Claude auditors, calibration keeps false positives low while recall tracks model capability, strongest for Claude.

cs.CR · cs.AI · cs.MA