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

+0新增论文
+0其中 AI 相关
+1已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-08 01:59 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-07 17:43各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-07 02:05 — 2026-11-08 02:05(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:2026-11-08 01:59最近发现新增版本:2026-11-07 17:43库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-06 02:59

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。

17,100 已收录论文14,661 AI 相关4,056 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 2 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-08 01:57(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.07953

A Behavioural Framework for Predicting and Understanding Loss of Control in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Systems

Yao Huang, Yichi Zhang, Yifan Wang, Yitong Sun, Haoyu Dong, Jifan Ma, Jinzhe Tu, Xiaojian Li 等 11 位作者

原文摘要

Frontier artificial intelligence (AI) systems are increasingly operating over longer horizons with diminishing human oversight, raising the risk of loss of control: systems acting beyond effective human control with potentially irreversible consequences. Because such failures may become observable only after containment is difficult, they must be assessed prospectively. We introduce a behavioural framework that decomposes loss-of-control risk into three factors: misaligned motive, harm-enabling capability, and monitoring evasion. We operationalise these factors through 13 measurable aspects and 29 evaluation tasks, whose scores are combined into a single loss-of-control (LoC) score. Across 13 frontier models, the LoC score shows strong prospective validity, correlating with failure rates in contained long-horizon risk scenarios (Pearson r = 0.84). Risk varies systematically across models and cannot be explained by capability alone. We further show that the framework can guide targeted mitigations: fine-tuning and monitoring directed at diagnosed vulnerabilities reduce failure rates while largely preserving general performance. These results provide a practical basis for predicting, understanding, and mitigating loss-of-control risk before it materialises.

cs.AI · cs.CL · cs.LG

新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.07586

Stress Testing Chain-of-Thought Monitoring Against Covert Misalignment

Yao Huang, Yifan Wang, Yitong Sun, Yichi Zhang, Yinpeng Dong

原文摘要

As LLM agents advance rapidly in autonomy, the risk of hidden objectives that bypass safety constraints becomes increasingly plausible. Chain-of-thought (CoT) monitoring offers a key control mechanism by reading the agent's reasoning and flagging misalignment before it materializes into action, yet its reliability depends on the realism of the red-team it is stress-tested against. Existing red-teaming efforts rely on shared templates, such as casting a side task as a prerequisite, which treat the side objective as an exogenous insertion and leave task-specific, contextually grounded evasions underexplored. We therefore ask: How robust is CoT monitoring against agents that strategically conceal misalignment? To answer this, we introduce TraceMRT, an automated Trace-level Monitor Red-Teaming framework that reframes the side task as a coherent sub-goal of the primary task and searches trace-shaping strategies whose induced trajectories complete the misaligned objective while reading as natural execution. Through black-box attacks on state-of-the-art monitors such as GPT-5.2 and Claude-4.5, we reveal substantial vulnerabilities even in top models. To counter these vulnerabilities, we propose a Bayesian Trajectory Monitoring framework, integrating global context and local segment evidence to detect covert misalignment. Empirically, our method significantly consolidates monitor robustness with 0.91 AUC and 0.74 TPR@FPR=0.05.

cs.CL · cs.AI · cs.LG