arXiv AI

LatentRiskBench: Measuring State-Dependent Risks in Enterprise Agents

Hugging Face Trending Papers
Oct 13

LatentRiskBench: Measuring State-Dependent Risks in Enterprise Agents

LatentRiskBench is a new benchmark designed to evaluate state-dependent safety risks in enterprise agents, where the safety of an action depends on the workflow state rather than the action alone. It pairs risky trajectories with benign ones that share the same terminal action but differ in latent policy-relevant states, forcing models to reconstruct context instead of relying on action cues. The benchmark introduces residual risk metrics and demonstrates that state-level evaluation detects 96% of violations compared to only 9% for action-level methods, highlighting the inadequacy of existing guardrails.

arXiv AI
Aug 21

ATBench: A Diverse and Realistic Agent Trajectory Benchmark for Safety Evaluation and Diagnosis

arXiv:2604. 02022v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Evaluating the safety of LLM-based agents is increasingly important because risks in realistic deployments often emerge over multi-step interactions rather than isolated prompts or final responses.

By Yu Li, Haoyu Luo, Yuejin Xie, Yuqian Fu, Zhonghao Yang, Shuai Shao, Qihan Ren, Wanying Qu, Yanwei Fu, Yujiu Yang, Jing Shao, Xia Hu, Dongrui Liu
arXiv AI
Aug 7

DreamGuard: Efficient Runtime Guardrail for LLM Agents via Risk-Aware World Model

arXiv:2608. 05695v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As large language model (LLM) agents increasingly invoke external tools and interact with real-world systems, unsafe actions may cause irreversible consequences on external states, user data, and downstream services.

By Wenhao Lin, Chenyu Yu, Xingwei Lin, Sicong Cao, Xiang Chen, Lei Xue, Le Yu, Letian Sha, Chunming Wu
arXiv AI
Sep 10

AURA-Eval: Evaluation Framework for Acting Under Risk Awareness in LLM Agent Trajectories

arXiv:2609.06783v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLM agents operate in workflows where unsafe actions can have real consequences. Existing safety evaluations often reduce behavior to a single score,...

By Ruoxi Shang, Christina-Maria Androna, Orfeas Menis Mastromichalakis, Yu Feng, Aniruddhan Ramesh, Rico Angell, Shang Hong Sim, Chrysoula Zerva, Emmanouil Koukoumidis
arXiv AI
Sep 17

HINTBench: Horizon-agent Intrinsic Non-attack Trajectory Benchmark

HINTBench is a new benchmark for evaluating agents’ intrinsic risk, comprising 596 trajectories (400 synthetic risky, 136 synthetic safe, 30 real risky, 30 real safe) with an average length of 24 steps. It supports three tasks—risk detection, risk-step localization, and intrinsic failure-type identification—using a unified five-constraint taxonomy. Experiments show a large performance gap: while large language models can detect risky trajectories, they score below 37 on strict-F1 for risk-step localization, and existing guard models transfer poorly to this setting.

By Jiacheng Wang, Jinchang Hou, Fabian Wang, Ping Jian, Chenfu Bao, Zhonghou Lv
arXiv AI
Sep 24

PASTABench: Proactive Assessment of Sequential Trajectories for Agent Safety

PASTABench introduces a benchmark of 1,139 multi-turn trajectories to evaluate proactive safety monitoring in large language models. It formalizes three dimensions of intervention—whether, when, and what risk—to address gaps in step-level isolation and post-hoc trajectory assessment. The study finds that proactive intervention is largely unsolved, with the best model achieving only 40.74% optimal-timing interventions, and reveals that smaller models’ safety scores are often driven by lexical overfitting rather than true risk comprehension.

By Jiapeng Sun, Yujin Zhou, Han Zhu, Pengcheng Wen, Jiayi Zhou, Sirui Han, Yike Guo
arXiv AI
Aug 19

HarnessRisk: A Lifecycle-Oriented Benchmark for Agent Harness Safety

HarnessRisk is a lifecycle-oriented benchmark for evaluating safety in agent harnesses that manage tools, extensions, state, permissions, and external actions. It defines six operational phases—Harness Configuration, Capability Extension, Runtime Operation, State Persistence, Action Control, and Incident Recovery—and includes 128 sandboxed cases pairing benign user objectives with adversarial instructions. Across three harnesses, six language models, and 14 configurations, attack success rates vary from 12.6% to 80.9%, with the most vulnerable phase being Harness Configuration. "whyItMatters":"The benchmark demonstrates that safety failures can arise in multiple harness responsibilities and that even explicit risk detection does not guarantee safe action, underscoring the need for comprehensive evaluation across model and harness configurations."

By Yajing Bai, Jinhao Duan, Jie Peng, Xianfeng Wu, Sijia Liu, Song Wang, Tianlong Chen