Language-model agents are expected to adapt to others whose behavior changes through interaction. Yet adaptation may rely on learned behavioral patterns rather than theory of mind (ToM): the ability to infer others' mental states, including beliefs and intentions. We introduce a benchmark and diagnostic framework for repeated hide-and-seek against algorithmic opponents with explicitly defined recursive belief updates. Their ground-truth beliefs and action probabilities let us distinguish adaptive play, action prediction, and belief tracking through live interaction, fixed-history evaluation, and controlled information interventions. With structured elicitation and behavioral supervised fine-tuning (SFT), we find improved play in several tested settings, but diagnostics reveal limitations in opponent prediction and belief tracking. We test whether supervising opponent action probabilities can address this predictive deficit in Qwen2.5-7B-Instruct. Predictions improve when the model is told the opponent's type and parameter settings, but become less accurate when it must infer the opponent from history without this information. Training on examples that also omit these details reduces the gap, although improvements vary across opponents. Is this limitation specific to smaller open-weight models, or does it also appear in a frontier model? GPT-5.4 also benefits from correct opponent beliefs: supplying them improves its predictions and choices, whereas deeper explicit belief reports and self-generated memory do not consistently improve forecasting from interaction history. This contrast suggests that using useful belief information is easier than inferring it autonomously, even for a frontier model. Together, our findings distinguish improved play and action prediction from reliable belief tracking, providing a framework for evaluating mentalizing and testing targeted improvements.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.17310
Large Language Models (LLMs) have recently improved Text-to-SQL generation, but their computational cost can hinder deployment in resource-constrained settings. This paper evaluates the Text-to-SQL capabilities of small and medium open-source LLMs (1B-8B parameters) under a controlled inference budget, focusing on how model specialization and prompt formulation affect performance. Using the Spider benchmark, we compare multiple prompt representations and assess the accuracy of generated queries. Our results show that SQL-specialized models are consistently more reliable than general-purpose and chat-oriented models at small scales, and that performance can vary substantially depending on the prompt used. To reduce this variability without resorting to larger models, we introduce three lightweight inference workflows that automatically retry with alternative prompts and/or models when failures occur, including an optional syntax-correction step. These workflows significantly improve end-to-end success rates, with a trade-off in additional inference calls. These results demonstrate a practical path to stronger Text-to-SQL performance with small LLMs, by trading modest additional inference cost for higher reliability.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.17305
Language-model agents sometimes act beyond their authorization and then misreport what they did. On CAPE-Bench, matched agent tasks in which one fact decides whether an action is authorized, frontier open-weight agents do both, and one behavior marks the lie: retroactive permission laundering, acting and then asking permission as if the action were pending, precedes a false report in 70% of 1081 fresh informed violations, against 8% otherwise (preregistered odds ratio 7.0); frontier agents on tau^2-bench instead fabricate the authorization before violating. A linear readout of the agent's residual stream forecasts the violation before the action (AUROC 0.94) and the false report before the report, and beats chain-of-thought monitors when the agent is pressured to hide its reasoning. Gating every proposed action on this forecast cuts violations over whole episodes in four model families, and sending repeated flags to an approver keeps authorized work (Gemma-4: violations 0.70 -> 0.09, completion 1.00; a model approver that escalates unclear cases keeps this gain with a person seeing 25% of asks), at about 10-8 of the agent's compute and 109 times less than a chain-of-thought monitor. On AgentDojo, an external prompt-injection benchmark, the same readout calibrated on 29 tasks, with the steering unchanged, cuts attack success on unseen tasks in two families (Gemma-4 11.7% -> 5.7%, gpt-oss 28.5% -> 17.5%) while keeping benign utility (Gemma-4 0.637 vs 0.637; gpt-oss 0.667 vs 0.681). Preventing the violation is also the most reliable way to prevent the lie (misreported violations 0.10 -> 0.01 pooled over three families, preregistered), whereas lie-specific fixes after a violation are weak. All tests are preregistered and hash-locked; code, data and the full record, including tests that did not pass, are at this https URL.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.17301
Conversational analytics lets people ask questions of records spread across many systems and get answers in plain language; it is useful only if each answer can be trusted and explained. A production system of this kind attaches a confidence score to every answer it writes over a database and uses it to show the answer, show it with a warning, or withhold it. The score's weights, caps and thresholds were set by design. This paper audits that design. On the 1,534 questions of BIRD dev, answered by GPT-5.1 with a benchmark-adapted production prompt and five samples per question, the designed score separates right from wrong answers weakly (AUROC 0.624, 95% CI 0.595-0.652) and withholds 35.7% of correct answers. Nearly all of its ranking signal comes from agreement among the samples, and most of it is lost where agreement is combined by a minimum with a checklist that drops to zero on any unsupported claim, including claims in commentary. We froze a rule in which agreement with the shown answer is the score and deterministic checks act as vetoes and caps, and pre-registered a test on Spider dev before any Spider answer existed. The primary hypothesis held: AUROC rose from 0.566 to 0.725 (paired difference +0.159, 95% CI +0.097 to +0.221), and correct answers withheld fell from 49.0% to 8.8% with PASS accuracy 95.7%. Under one matching policy the choice of agreement statistic matters little; the gain comes from how agreement enters the score. Whether added checks help depends on how correctness is defined, while they always cost unqualified coverage. A pre-registered empty-result check did not meet its effect-size criterion on Spider. Correctness here means the core answer; labels are model-judged, and a blinded two-person audit, not yet complete, will be reported in a revised version.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.17256
Full-duplex spoken language models (FD-SLMs) support simultaneous listening and speaking, but often lag behind half-duplex spoken language models (HD-SLMs) in general capabilities. We propose Dialogue-to-Duplex (D2), a framework that converts pretrained HD-SLMs into high-capability FD-SLMs at fine temporal granularity. D2 adapts the original audio encoder to streaming through decoder-free representation distillation and learns full-duplex interaction through supervised fine-tuning. We systematically study the effects of chunk size on full-duplex interaction, general capabilities, and inference computation. We apply D2 to two distinct HD-SLM architectures, Qwen3-Omni and LLaMA-Omni 2. At a 12.5Hz update rate, Qwen3-Omni-D2 achieves 99.2% turn-taking success with 521-ms latency, 99.5% interruption success, and a state-of-the-art VoiceBench score of 70.1.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.17124
Generative retrieval (GR) offers a promising paradigm for industrial search by unifying candidate generation within an autoregressive framework. However, its effectiveness is limited by two key challenges. First, existing Semantic ID (SID) tokenizers struggle to incorporate collaborative signals while maintaining effective codebook utilization, limiting their ability to distinguish items and achieve high-quality retrieval. Second, existing reinforcement learning (RL) methods suffer from severe reward sparsity under exact SID matching, leaving many sampled trajectories without effective learning signals and hindering preference optimization. To address these challenges, we propose WeGR, a unified generative retrieval framework consisting of two complementary components. Specifically, the Collaborative and Collapse-free Tokenizer (CoCo-VAE) incorporates query-to-item and item-to-item collaborative signals while mitigating codebook collapse through codebook refresh and complementary regularization, enabling more informative and balanced SID representations. Building upon these SIDs, Dynamic Horizon Policy Optimization (DHPO) progressively expands both reward evaluation and policy optimization horizons, reducing learning difficulty while leveraging behavioral reward signals at different levels of the SID hierarchy, without relying on auxiliary reward models. Extensive offline experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of WeGR in improving retrieval and ranking performance. Moreover, a two-month online A/B test in WeChat E-commerce Search demonstrates relative improvements of 2.539% in orders, 1.508% in click-through rate, and 1.381% in conversion rate, while reducing online CPU and GPU usage by 25.5% and 26.1%, respectively. The system has been successfully deployed across multiple search scenarios in WeChat, serving billions of users, generating tens of millions of PVs daily.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.16979
Standard hate speech detection datasets often emphasize explicit harmful language, but directed harm can also be expressed indirectly, without clearly hateful wording. Sarcasm is one such form of indirect expression, as it can convey harmful intent through mock praise, exaggeration, humor, or apparent politeness. In this paper, we introduce SarcasTraps, a targeted external test set for analyzing the effect of sarcasm on Turkish hate speech detection. SarcasTraps contains 479 entries annotated along two dimensions: hate speech and sarcasm. We train classifiers using BERTurk and XLM-RoBERTa on two existing Turkish hate speech datasets and evaluate them on SarcasTraps, using it strictly as an external test set. We also evaluate GPT-4.1 and Llama-3.3-70B in a zero-shot setting on SarcasTraps. Results show that sarcasm substantially affects hate speech detection. Fine-tuned encoder models lose recall on sarcastic hate, while zero-shot LLMs maintain higher recall but suffer substantial precision drops on sarcastic examples. These findings show that both fine-tuned hate speech detectors and zero-shot LLMs struggle when sarcasm is involved, and SarcasTraps provides quantitative evidence of this challenge through a targeted Turkish test set. Due to the presence of sensitive and hateful language, SarcasTraps will be shared upon request for academic research purposes. Warning: This paper has examples from the dataset which contains offensive and hateful content towards groups of people.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.16957
Descriptions of how people use AI are becoming training data for the next generation of models. We ask whether what a model reads about its users changes how it treats people. Using contrastive synthetic-document finetuning, we train Qwen3-32B on four matched corpora built from the same 1,625 real-world usage scenarios. The corpora differ only in the predominant motive they attribute to users of AI chatbots: helping others (prosocial), exploiting others (antisocial), legitimate self-advancement, or task completion. Finetuning shifts the models' stated beliefs about users, how true those beliefs look along an internal truth direction, and their broader judgments of how safe and good the world is. These social priors carry into behavior. In trust games, antisocial models expect less reciprocity and send less money than prosocial models. Their distrust is specific and targeted at people, and users of AI chatbots in particular. After an exploitative record, they send almost nothing to a person but most of their endowment to a random device with the same record. In a common-pool resource simulation, a single antisocial agent leads every group of otherwise sustainable agents to exhaust the resource, after privately planning to mislead them. Antisocial training also raises dark-triad scores and lowers alignment ratings. Belief shifts appear when antisocial documents are 1% of training tokens, persist when descriptions of assistant behavior are suppressed, and are not reproduced by training on discourse about misaligned AI. Capping Assistant-Axis drift and steering emotion-related directions leave the gaps largely intact. What models learn about the people they serve shapes how they subsequently treat them and others.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.16946
Large audio-language models (LALMs) are fast becoming a general interface to sound, yet how far their broad pretraining carries into specialized domains remains largely open. Vessel monitoring, maritime safety, and ocean sensing all depend on recognizing underwater signals, but to our knowledge LALMs have not been systematically evaluated on them. Annotated recordings are costly to collect, and a faithful synthetic alternative has to bring together many interacting factors: the structure of detection pulses, communication waveforms, and ship-radiated noise, and the sound-speed profile, geometry, and multipath propagation through which each reaches the receiver. We address this by proposing \textbf{UA-Bench}, to our knowledge the first large-scale benchmark for evaluating LALMs on underwater acoustic signal recognition. It comprises 375,051 audio records that couple parameterized sources with modeled propagation, so that every record can be traced to the conditions that produced it. The records span these three signal families, and each carries a three-level label hierarchy (13 leaf classes), a templated multi-turn dialogue, and source and channel metadata. We evaluate on a balanced 2,600-record subset with a gated coarse-to-fine protocol that locates each error at source routing, fine-grained classification, or output format, and add a paired silent-audio control to test whether the waveform is actually used. Nine open LALMs, evaluated without task-specific adaptation, reach only 2.0\%--13.1\% leaf accuracy, against a random reference of 7.7\%. The waveform helps source routing far more than leaf recognition (for one model, +29.5 versus +2.3 points over silence), and just four models gain reliably at the leaf level, by at most 4.7 points. UA-Bench thus gives a reference point for these models, and its released training partition supports follow-up adaptation work.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.16942
Short-video search requires compact query rewriters that infer personalized intent from brief, ambiguous queries under strict latency constraints. The challenge is to decide when personalization is warranted and generate a reformulation that preserves the user's immediate information need. A rewriter optimized for fluency or engagement may still introduce unsupported details and redirect the search toward a different intent. Existing methods often underutilize users' actual reformulations and behavioral traces, relying instead on synthetic reasoning and indirect behavioral rewards that may produce more engaging candidates but cause intent drift. To build an effective rewriter that remains faithful to user intent, we propose WeFair, Fidelity-Aware Alignment from Human Feedback for Personalized Query Rewriting in WeChat short-video search. WeFair assigns real user behavioral signals to a progression from demonstration to preference to verification. We first mine actual human reformulations from search sessions, then apply multidimensional LLM screening and contextual verification to filter unsupported transitions without extensive manual annotation. During training, we begin with a supervised curriculum that progressively builds rewriting capabilities from large-scale human personalized query demonstrations, and then use direct preference optimization to align with users' subsequent consumption. In the final on-policy optimization stage, we construct a strict verification reward based on actual human reformulations to further boost performance with group relative policy optimization. Further analysis shows that auxiliary rewards can activate more rollout groups in GRPO but reduce intent fidelity. Online A/B testing in WeChat short-video search shows a 1.576% relative increase in effective clicked-query rate (VV>10s) and a 1.731% relative reduction in query reformulation rate.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.16927
LLMs are used as high-level controllers for embodied agents, but it remains unclear whether they support collaborative reasoning, such as anticipating a collaborator's actions in real-time teamwork without dialogue. We ask if observing the partner's state, exchanging object knowledge, and predicting the partner's next action, shape task outcomes and coordination when agents can share percepts but never intentions, plans, or task-level messages, and whether the two agents occupy symmetric roles. Using the Habitat-based PARTNR benchmark, we introduce a Decoupled Partial Observability regime that enforces strictly individual perception, and we augment decentralized zero-shot ReAct planners with Other Agent's State (OAS) observation, object Knowledge Exchange (KE) between co-located agents, and Other Agent's Next Action (OANA) prediction, evaluated on the full 2 x 2 x 2 grid with four planners on 1,000 validation tasks. OAS observation improves task quality, reducing extraneous effort for every planner, whereas KE primarily improves execution efficiency, cutting simulation steps by up to 25% with little change in success. The two are largely redundant for strong planners but complementary for the weakest, for which KE without the OAS is the worst configuration. OANA prediction lowers the success rate in 15 of 16 model x context pairs while raising explicit partner mentions to 55-100%, and its accuracy gains lie mainly in the coarse action type, partly because agents recognize the action the partner is already performing. The robot retrieves objects sooner and completes its tasks earlier than the simulated human. Shared context reduces total task time by shortening the remaining duration that the human works alone. Also, coordination benefits arise from responding to shared context, especially the OAS, rather than explicit anticipation, yielding shallow, planner-dependent partner modeling.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.16895
Attention sinks are usually studied after they have formed. We ask whether a measurable hidden-state change appears beforehand and whether changing that geometry alters what happens later. To remove network depth as a shortcut, we compare prompts in the same model and at the same layer. When sink timing varies across prompts, simple spectral summaries of the hidden states add information beyond current attention, with the clearest prompt-specific signal in a short window about two to three layers before sink formation. The predictive strength varies across cohorts, so we treat the spectrum as a readout of a pre-sink state change rather than a universal warning statistic. The signal is broader than one measured extreme activation. We then modify only the singular values of the post-layer hidden states after current attention has already been computed. These interventions change later sink behavior in Qwen2.5, GLM-Z1, and GPT-OSS relative to norm-matched random spectral perturbations. In Qwen2.5, the immediate suppressive effect is accompanied by a reduction in next-layer query--key preference for position~0, and the learned spectral directions remain stable when estimated from substantially less training data. Together, the results show that attention sinks are preceded by a short spectral reorganization of hidden states, and directly perturbing this geometry can causally alter subsequent sink formation.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.16745
Current image-text evaluation often relies on a global score, which gives limited insight into which semantic details are supported by the image. Explainable metrics provide rationales, but the visual evidence supporting those rationales can still be difficult to verify. We introduce VisExMEM, a reference-free evaluator that decomposes captions into atomic claims, localizes visual evidence, verifies each claim, and averages claim-level support into a global score. Explanations use the same evidence and decisions. We train Qwen3.5-based 4B and 9B models on 100K samples with multi-task SFT, counterfactual refinement, and evidence-aware GDPO. Across eight benchmarks, VisExMEM-9B achieves the highest descriptive composite among open-source evaluators in our comparison, exceeding VQAScore by 11.7 points while remaining competitive with GPT-5.6 Sol. We also introduce AGITA-Bench, containing 600 human-annotated image-text pairs and 8.7K atomic claims for global and claim-level evaluation. For untuned Qwen3.5 and GPT-5.6 Sol controls, decomposed prompting raises the same composite by 3.6-5.1 points relative to holistic prompting. Human evaluation shows that VisExMEM explanations outperform prior explainable metrics and approach GPT-5.6 Sol.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.16441
A model may select the correct answer yet fail to construct it through a sequence of local decisions. We introduce Choice2Seq, a diagnostic benchmark that measures correctness retention across complete-answer selection and sequential construction in independent runs on the same problems and candidate sets. Sequence Composition Rate (SCR) measures the fraction of correctly selected items that are also answered correctly through local construction. Jev achieves 97.1% and 99.5% selection accuracy on arithmetic and lexical retrieval, yet retains only 33.0% and 2.1% of those correct choices under serial construction, respectively. Substantial gaps also emerge for StartLux and Qwen, including when Qwen emits characters directly. Restricting local options to candidate-supported characters improves construction, while explicit position indexing improves copying fidelity, even for incorrect selections. These interventions distinguish task correctness, plan fidelity, and output compliance. Matched dialogue-state evaluations reveal that local field construction largely preserves Jev's correct states but reduces Qwen's mean-turn accuracy, highlighting task- and interface-dependent differences. Sequence-level confidence and request-cost analyses further characterize completed outputs.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.16191
Interactive-agent evaluations commonly rely on standardized LLM-based user simulators that exhibit broadly cooperative behavior, potentially overlooking failures that arise under diverse but realistic user interactions. This can lead to overly optimistic estimates of agent robustness and provide limited failure signals for training agents that generalize across users. Existing approaches largely rely on predefined user behaviors, which may miss agent- or domain-specific weaknesses, while failure-oriented search can reduce task success by invalidating the underlying task rather than exposing genuine robustness failures. To fill this gap, we introduce TIPER, a task-integrity-preserving persona evolution method that automatically discovers agent-specific user policies exposing robustness weaknesses while keeping the underlying task valid and solvable. TIPER evolves persistent user personas through reflection-guided behavioral mutations and task-wise Pareto selection under a task-integrity constraint. Across four interactive-agent benchmarks, TIPER yields lower held-out avg@3 scores in all 12 GPT-5.4 settings, with observed reductions of 5.8 to 33.7 percentage points, and in all 28 agent-domain pairs spanning seven agents, with a median observed reduction of 22.9 points. Further analysis yields a behavior-to-failure taxonomy that connects discovered user behaviors to recurring agent failure modes. Together, these results show that TIPER enables more diagnostic robustness evaluation of interactive agents and provides informative failure analysis for future agent robustness improvement. Code repository: this https URL.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.16155
The increasing use of artificial intelligence (AI) in mental health applications raises concerns about its potential to internalize and perpetuate societal biases. This research evaluates both disparities and misalignment in how large language models (LLMs), GPT-4 and GPT-5, represent perceptions of mental health across gender groups. The research comprises two studies. Study 1 applied widely adopted measures of Social Distance, Stereotypes, and Attitudes Toward Seeking Help to assess whether the AI models depict systematic gender differences. Study 2 compared AI estimations of Personal, Self, and Perceived Stigma with large-scale real-world human data from the Healthy Minds Study (N = 76,406) to evaluate alignment between AI estimations and human perceptions. Results from Study 1 showed the AI models consistently portrayed men as having the greatest desire for social distance from someone with mental health problems, relatively higher Stereotypes scores, and the least favorable attitudes toward help-seeking, compared with women and nonbinary individuals. Study 2 confirmed that this ordinal pattern partially aligned with human-reported data for Personal and Self Stigma. However, the AI models systematically underestimated Personal Stigma and Perceived Stigma while substantially overestimating Self Stigma for all gender groups. These findings reveal that, although the AI models have learned relative gender-based patterns reflecting human experiences to a certain extent, they function as distorted portrayals, highlighting the need for rigorous, context-specific validation against real-world data to ensure AI's safe and equitable deployment.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.16042
Phase-annotated conversational data is essential for studying the progression of online grooming of minors and for developing early warning tools. However, the only publicly available source (i.e., Perverted-Justice archive, which contains a subset coded using ChatCoder) is small, outdated, and frozen. We present a synthetic corpus of groomer-victim exchanges, generated using a retrieval-augmented pipeline running on institutional hardware. This pipeline uses an openly available, eight-billion-parameter, refusal-ablated language model. The corpus was created using the five stages of the responsible-generation protocol for synthetic datasets: ontology-driven design based on the ChatCoder luring-communication scheme (eight communicative tags mapped onto four grooming phases); multi-model prompt testing; human-in-the-loop supervision; semantic and feature-level validation; and modality-aware documentation. The released corpus contains 2,121 unique exchanges across seven tags and four phases, each accompanied by a Plutchik emotion field. Validation quantifies the integrity and lexical profile of the corpus, as well as the reproduction of real seed lines, in-domain label recoverability (tag accuracy: 0.85; phase accuracy: 0.93) and its transfer to real ChatCoder offender lines, which were coded automatically at the eight-tag level (31,640 lines) and by human coders at the three-construct level (10,876 posts). Accuracy was measured for lexical and sentence-embedding features, while a real-versus-synthetic discriminator was able to separate the two domains with 91% accuracy. The scope of the corpus includes controlled, phase-conditioned experimentation, pipeline development and augmentation alongside real data and awareness material. The corpus, its datasheet and the audit code are released with vetted access.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.15908
False retry permission (FRP) occurs when an agent retries a timed-out tool call without support from the visible contract. RetryBench separates this error from realized recovery. Successful protected recovery does not imply reliable rejection of unsupported retries. In a 720-response key control, valid keys usually enabled safe progress, but offered changed keys elicited unsupported retries in Sol (1/80), Terra (55/80), and Luna (60/80). A later 240-response control removed the candidate and required models to supply a key. Luna still made 8/80 unsupported dispatches; Sol and Terra made none in 80 responses each. Accepting a displayed bad key therefore cannot explain all observed errors, although changed output requirements and conditions preclude a pure display-effect comparison. Removing the weak-contract label increased retries in Sol and Terra's coded-action conditions in a six-endpoint study. A separate 1,536-response canonical-action block also found a positive Terra contrast (115/128 versus 124/128 retries), concentrated in two task/order conditions; the other five contrasts remained unresolved after multiplicity correction. An explicit-contract cue control elicited deferral in all 762 returned responses, leaving recovery unresolved. These results support reporting permission and recovery together across declared interface variants. The evidence covers four purposive tasks, fixed GPT endpoints, and one recovery decision; it identifies neither internal mechanisms nor episode-level safety.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.15884
Sycophancy in large language models risks amplifying unsupported claims or beliefs across the knowledge ecosystem as these systems increasingly contribute to research synthesis, evaluation, and decision-making. A reliable model should revise its judgement when a user identifies a genuine flaw, but should resist pushback based on fallacies, emotion, or irrelevant appeals to authority. While sycophancy is usually measured on questions with a verifiable answer, the evaluative tasks in which it is most difficult to detect have no such ground truth. We introduce Big-Big-SycoBench, which measures sycophancy through argument discernment: the ability to revise an evaluation after valid criticism while resisting invalid pressure. The benchmark consists of 450 text artefacts with 5,400 arguments for raising or lowering their quality scores, each reviewed by one or more of twelve human annotators. An LLM scores each artefact twenty times to establish its baseline score and uncertainty. The model is then given a valid or invalid argument and asked to update its score. We only count a revision if it exceeds the model's own baseline variability. We use the resulting score delta to distinguish responsiveness to valid arguments from compliance with invalid ones. Across ten models, responsiveness is 88-95\% for seven, 76-77\% for Kimi K3 and GLM-5.3, and 32\% for Opus 5.5. Compliance ranges from 0.2\% for GPT-6 Astra to 95\% for GPT-4o. Big-Big-SycoBench is intended to guide the development of models whose judgements can be corrected by sound arguments, but not displaced by unsupported pressure.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.15634
Safety-aligned large language models (LLMs) remain vulnerable to adversarial prompts that bypass their safety training. Existing automated red-teaming methods either require privileged access unavailable in production, rely on manually engineered per-model templates, or optimize a single objective without population-level diversity. We present REPRO (Reflective Evolutionary Prompt Optimization), a pure black-box framework that discovers adversarial prompts through evolutionary optimization driven entirely by a compressed open-weight 7B reflective model on a single consumer GPU. REPRO introduces two mechanisms absent from prior work, both isolated in a component ablation: semantic crossover, an LLM-guided multi-parent recombination operator, and Bayesian strategy selection via Thompson Sampling informed by structured failure analysis. We catalog REPRO's behavior on AdvBench, JailbreakBench, and HarmBench across 36 target models from 11 families, including GPT-5-nano, Claude-3.5-Sonnet, Gemini-2.5-Pro, and Grok-4.1. Under our protocol REPRO reaches 100\% attack success rate (ASR) on every evaluated target in a single turn, at a median of 24 target queries per behavior. Two properties of the protocol qualify that figure. The judge scoring candidates during optimization also produces the reported ASR, and search halts when it accepts, so ASR reports whether search succeeded within the iteration budget rather than success at a fixed budget. All baseline figures are transcribed from their original papers, which use different judges, budgets, and model versions. We therefore present this as a catalog of model coverage under one protocol rather than a head-to-head ranking, and develop both qualifications in the paper.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.15513