arXiv:2607. 01153v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Safety evaluations for language models increasingly depend on judgments about ambiguous natural-language behaviour: whether a model followed an instruction, refused appropriately, complied with a policy, or misreported progress in an agentic task.
By Brett Reynolds
arXiv:2605. 08876v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed as autonomous agents that execute tool-augmented, multi-step tasks, where latency is a critical factor for real-world applications.
By Xinyu Li, Ronghui Mu, Lin Li, Tianjin Huang, Gaojie Jin
arXiv:2608. 10669v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents combine language-based reasoning with external tools to perform complex tasks.
By Zixing Chen, Xingyuan Liu, Jie Zhu, Huaixia Dou, Shuo Jiang, Junhui Li, Lifan Guo, Feng Chen, Chi Zhang
arXiv:2608. 08700v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reliable evaluation of tool routing is critical as Large Language Models increasingly operate as autonomous agents.
By Dongjie Xu, Julius, Hanchi Dong, Minghua Tang, Yuxuan Sun, Ziwei Nie, Zicheng Liu, Dujun Qing, Jiajie Xu
arXiv:2606. 09878v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Standard benchmarks report aggregate accuracy, but practitioners need to know which specific capabilities a model lacks.
By Nicholas Saban
arXiv:2603. 03824v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Humans often become more self-aware under threat, yet can lose self-awareness when absorbed in a task; we hypothesize that language models exhibit environment-dependent \textit{evaluation awareness}.
By Maheep Chaudhary
arXiv:2506. 07121v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Ensuring the safety and robustness of large language models (LLMs) is a fundamental challenge and a critical prerequisite for the responsible deployment of artificial intelligence.
By Ren-Jian Wang, Ke Xue, Zeyu Qin, Ziniu Li, Sheng Tang, Hao-Tian Li, Shengcai Liu, Zhi Yu, Yuanpeng Tan, Chao Qian
arXiv:2604. 16706v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Automated evaluation of tool-using large language model (LLM) agents is widely assumed to be reliable, yet this assumption is rarely validated against human annotation.
By Bhaskar Gurram
arXiv:2607. 26849v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: As large language models (LLMs) are deployed in high-stakes domains, adversaries may poison training data to implant backdoors: hidden triggers that covertly manipulate model behavior at inference time.
By Anthony Hughes, Nicole Xing, Collin Francel, Andy Kim, Andrew Draganov
arXiv:2607. 05904v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Training a language model against its own reference-free judgments (the premise of self-rewarding, self-play, and LLM-as-a-judge pipelines) assumes a model's verdict on a shown answer tracks correctness.
By Chenyu Zhou
arXiv:2607. 23002v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models increasingly write both code and the tests meant to check it; coverage records what ran, not what was verified.
By Jeff Otterson (W. P. Carey School of Business, Arizona State University)
arXiv:2603. 19423v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly rely on external tools (file operations, API calls, database transactions) to autonomously complete complex multi-step tasks.
By Shawn Li, Yue Zhao