arXiv:2605. 17062v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Spracklen et al.
Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv Machine Learning.
The paper introduces a two‑layer detector to prevent ‘slopsquatting’—the risk of local coding LLMs fabricating Python package names that adversaries can pre‑register on PyPI. The first layer checks PyPI for existence, while the second uses a Random Forest classifier on ten name‑and‑metadata features; an import reconciler resolves naming mismatches. Embedded in a LangGraph state machine, the system retries at escalating temperatures and falls back to stronger models, achieving hallucination‑free code in 76% of 300 curated prompts and recovering additional runs through intra‑ and cross‑model retries.
The paper investigates a new failure mode of tool‑augmented large language model agents: calling non‑existent tools with arguments that do not match any declared schema. It introduces a five‑class taxonomy of tool hallucination, presents a training‑free closed‑world resolver that checks registry membership and signatures, and demonstrates that hallucinations persist across ten hosted models and various invocation surfaces, including the Model Context Protocol. The authors release a Hallucinated‑Tools Benchmark to enable comparison of resolver methods.
arXiv:2605. 23243v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: We evaluate whether frontier LLMs are ready for cybersecurity through a dual-mode benchmark: white-box function-level vulnerability detection (VulnLLM-R, across C/Java/Python) and black-box web application security testing (five production-style applications with 118 ground-truth vulnerabilities across 20+ CWE families, which we will open-source).
The paper investigates how large language models (LLMs) hallucinate nonexistent software packages during code generation and evaluates methods to mitigate this issue. It finds that current evaluation practices overestimate hallucination rates, especially for Python, and that Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) and Self-Refine reduce hallucinations across multiple models and languages. The study also introduces Package Utility (PU) to measure whether defenses preserve useful recommendations and shows that Greedy decoding offers the best trade‑off between mitigation and utility, while adversarial prompts significantly increase hallucination rates, particularly in Ruby.
The paper introduces the Neutral Prompting Attack (NPA), a stealthy method that uses semantically benign instructions to increase the likelihood of large language models hallucinating non‑existent package names in coding agents. Unlike traditional dependency steering, NPA does not target a specific package but shifts the model’s output toward more speculative names. Experiments across multiple LLMs show that NPA raises hallucination rates, affects pip install success, alters the distribution of hallucinated packages, and bypasses existing static‑analysis, LLM‑based, and agent‑based defenses.
arXiv:2606. 00801v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Current approaches to LLM adversarial testing suffer from coverage gaps: manual red-teaming does not scale, LLM-as-attacker methods exhibit mode collapse, and gradient-based approaches produce uninterpretable gibberish.