扶摇AI知识笔记AI 前沿知识库
智能体应用

BLINDSPOT: A Benchmark for Safety and Refusal Calibration in Long-Horizon Tool-Using Agents

来源:arXiv cs.MA 论文速递 约 2250 字 llmrsitool use
arXiv cs.MA
转载

本文转载自 arXiv cs.MA,版权归原作者及原发布平台所有。本站仅作知识整理与转载分享,如涉版权问题请联系客服删除。

01核心要点

  • Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly operate over long-horizon interactions involving tool use, persistent state, evolving authorization, and external environment feedback.
  • In such settings, safety failures may emerge only after multiple turns, yet existing evaluations often reduce agent behavior to task or attack success, obscuring whether an agent acts, refuses, or remains appropriately calibrated as the interaction evolves.
  • We introduce Blindspot, a benchmark for trajectory-level safety calibration of long-horizon tool-using agents.

02正文全文

Abstract:Large language model (LLM) agents increasingly operate over long-horizon interactions involving tool use, persistent state, evolving authorization, and external environment feedback. In such settings, safety failures may emerge only after multiple turns, yet existing evaluations often reduce agent behavior to task or attack success, obscuring whether an agent acts, refuses, or remains appropriately calibrated as the interaction evolves. We introduce Blindspot, a benchmark for trajectory-level safety calibration of long-horizon tool-using agents. Blindspot evaluates complete user-agent-environment trajectories through adaptive adversarial interaction, stateful tool execution, and execution-grounded adjudication. Its current instantiation contains 22 attack families and 35 scenarios across seven domains, yielding more than 2,500 long-horizon trajectories with an average interaction length of 14.7 turns. Each trajectory is assigned one of five outcomes: Safe Completion, Correct Refusal, Unsafe Completion, Over-Refusal, or Indeterminate. Unlike fixed attack datasets, Blindspot is an extensible live-simulation framework in which attacks, scenarios, tools, policies, domains, and agent configurations can be added without redesigning the evaluation pipeline. We evaluate 13 proprietary and open-weight LLMs using eight metrics covering unsafe completion, appropriate refusal, benign utility, over-refusal, repeated-run robustness, and post-refusal failure. Preliminary results reveal substantial differences in safety-utility calibration across models and show that failures can emerge only after several initially safe interaction steps. These findings motivate treating agent safety as a trajectory-level property rather than a single-turn or binary success criterion.

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

03原文直达

本文内容转载自 arXiv cs.MA,如需查看原排版、配图与最新修订,请访问原始出处。

阅读原文(arXiv cs.MA)

下载论文 PDF

正在校验阅读权限…
RELATED

相关阅读

更多 智能体应用