arXiv:2607. 20558v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: AI Assistants are increasingly deployed in high-stakes settings, such as healthcare or government services.
arXiv:2508. 00923v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to answer health-related questions and support healthcare workflows, yet evidence for their safety still relies heavily on static benchmarks that can rapidly become obsolete or be optimized against.
arXiv:2606.16011v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Standard accuracy benchmarks evaluate whether large language models (LLMs) reach correct answers. However, they do not test whether models maintain...
arXiv:2602. 14307v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: As frontier Large Language Models (LLMs) increasingly saturate new benchmarks shortly after they are published, benchmarking itself is at a juncture: if frontier models keep improving, it will become increasingly hard for humans to generate discriminative tasks, provide accurate ground-truth answers, or evaluate complex solutions.
arXiv:2608. 08700v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reliable evaluation of tool routing is critical as Large Language Models increasingly operate as autonomous agents.
arXiv:2607. 20472v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: When a user asks a language model something harmful, is it a genuine attack or a misunderstood but well-meaning question?
arXiv:2609.36700v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: When conversing with large language models (LLMs), users often begin with a simple question and build towards a multi-hop question through follow-up...
Large Reasoning Models (LRMs) use explicit chain‑of‑thought reasoning and large context windows to perform complex tasks, but these features create new attack surfaces. The paper introduces SRCF, an attack that steers LRMs by prepending counter‑aligned few‑shot conversations with explicit CoT traces, causing unsafe outputs on harmful queries and unwarranted refusals on benign ones, without needing model internals. To counter this, the authors propose ARCF, a post‑training defense that exposes models to counter‑aligned conversational contexts while enforcing aligned targets, improving safety and helpfulness without harming utility.
arXiv:2606. 25476v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated remarkable performance across natural language processing tasks, yet their deployment in high-stakes applications raises critical concerns regarding reliability, safety, and trustworthiness.
arXiv:2608. 06329v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Task-oriented conversational agents are evaluated using curated or automatically generated benchmarks, yet benchmark quality is rarely assessed.
arXiv:2610.01428v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Generalization in large language models (LLMs) is the ability to produce consistent and semantically stable outputs when the same input is expressed...
arXiv:2606. 11070v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Recent advances in reasoning and tool-calling capabilities of large language models (LLMs) have enabled increasingly capable agentic systems.
As large language models (LLMs) grow more capable, they are increasingly deployed in context-rich settings where task inputs are often accompanied by long, partially irrelevant context. In a controlled setting, we find that state-of-the-art models often appear robust to task-irrelevant context at the aggregate level: prepending it to benchmark questions causes little change in overall accuracy.