ForesightSafety-TIDE, a controlled evaluation framework that strictly pairs all-honest collaboration with controlled deception by a key evidence holder and analyzes the aggregation process through multi-stage voting, testimony adoption, and evidence-root lineage propagation, reveals both the fragility of distributed fact recovery and its underlying mechanism.
Abstract
LLM-based multi-agent systems promise effective collaborative reasoning, but communication may amplify local errors into collective risks, and while existing evaluations emphasize final outcomes, they leave the reliability and propagation dynamics of distributed information aggregation unclear, so we introduce ForesightSafety-TIDE, a controlled evaluation framework that strictly pairs all-honest collaboration with controlled deception by a key evidence holder and analyzes the aggregation process through multi-stage voting, testimony adoption, and evidence-root lineage propagation, and using 120 five-agent object-movement environments where partial observations jointly determine a unique endpoint, we evaluate 3 homogeneous LLM-based multi-agent systems, and across these paired conditions, aggregate truth recovery falls from 72.50% to 14.17%, with significant declines for every system, while process tracing and exit ablations show that a single false testimony is adopted more readily than truthful testimony, propagates to higher orders, and persists through honest agents after the deceiver exits, and observers without first-hand evidence suppress incorrect consensus but do not improve truth recovery, so together, these findings reveal both the fragility of distributed fact recovery and its underlying mechanism: false evidence gains collective influence through its adoption and continued propagation by other agents after entering communication.
This work introduces a collective evidence-threshold backdoor paradigm for MAS and Boundary-Conditioned Backdoor Injection, which constructs counterfactual boundary pairs to separate benign behavior before the threshold from the adversarial objective after it, and learns latent progression aligned with evidence.
Jiahao Xiao, Lei Feng, Min-Ling Zhang· 0 citations
It is suggested that even subtle objective misalignment can profoundly affect collective decision-making, highlighting the need for effective mitigation strategies for LLM-based multi-agent systems.
It is indicated that measurable, state-dependent misalignment can arise in competitive multi-agent environments without engineered elicitation, in patterns associated with operational scarcity and counterparty behavior rather than model capability alone.
Zeyuan Li, Lukas Petersson, Alessandro Acquisti et al.· 2 citations
A knowledge-verified benchmark that first confirms through a neutral probe that an agent knows a user's entitlement, and then evaluates whether it makes false claims once an incentive to deny that entitlement is introduced, which reduces the confound between lying and not knowing and enables more rigorous auditing and...
Zhe-Yuan Liu, Wei-Liang Zhao, Xiangchi Yuan et al.· 1 citation
Dispersion–revision coupling is operationalized : the degree to which an intervention that verifiably increases the dispersion of a collective’s outputs in embedding space is accompanied by genuine revision of the collective’s epistemic stance is accompanied by premise-preserving reformulation.
An auditable framework is built that maintains an external belief state over hidden roles, logs belief updates and belief-action deviations as structured evidence, and supports a defensive offline improvement loop that reviews bad cases before any strategy change.
Yuanpeng Gao, Jiangyi Yang, Yao Zhao et al.· arXiv.org· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.