← 研踪 PaperTrailACL Anthology · ACL 2026:acl:2026.acl-long.1915 · 记录 #1
Multimodal Safety Evaluation in Generative Agent Social Simulations
来源日期（仅到月份） 2026-07
来源记录日期 2026-07
雷达观测 2026-11-01 21:48
摘要
Can generative agents be trusted in multimodal environments? Despite recent advances, agents remain limited in their ability to reason about safety, coherence, and trust across modalities. We introduce a reproducible simulation framework to evaluate generative agents in three aspects: (1) safety improvement over time via iterative plan revision in multimodal scenarios; (2) detection of unsafe activities across social contexts; and (3) social dynamics, measured through interaction and acceptance rates. These multimodal agents are evaluated using metrics that quantify plan revisions and unsafe-to-safe conversions. Experiments show that while agents detect direct multimodal contradictions, they often fail to align local revisions with global safety, achieving only a 55% success rate in correcting unsafe plans. We release a dataset of 1,000 multimodal plans, yielding more than 600,000 simulation steps. Notably, 45% of unsafe actions are accepted when paired with misleading visual cues, revealing a strong tendency to overtrust visual content. Code is available at https://github.com/AdonaiVera/X-CASE
论文发现出处
这些页面提供论文线索，不代表同行评审或质量认证。
观测到的版本
平台记录号代表本站观测到的元数据变化，不是作者修订号。来源日期仅到月份或年份时，按该月或该年首日存档。
记录 #1 · 2026-07 · 最新观测版本
Multimodal Safety Evaluation in Generative Agent Social Simulations
Can generative agents be trusted in multimodal environments? Despite recent advances, agents remain limited in their ability to reason about safety, coherence, and trust across modalities. We introduce a reproducible simulation framework to evaluate generative agents in three aspects: (1) safety improvement over time via iterative plan revision in multimodal scenarios; (2) detection of unsafe activities across social contexts; and (3) social dynamics, measured through interaction and acceptance rates. These multimodal agents are evaluated using metrics that quantify plan revisions and unsafe-to-safe conversions. Experiments show that while agents detect direct multimodal contradictions, they often fail to align local revisions with global safety, achieving only a 55% success rate in correcting unsafe plans. We release a dataset of 1,000 multimodal plans, yielding more than 600,000 simulation steps. Notably, 45% of unsafe actions are accepted when paired with misleading visual cues, revealing a strong tendency to overtrust visual content. Code is available at https://github.com/AdonaiVera/X-CASE
查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗