Skip to content

SchemeArena: Factorized Stress Testing of Scheming in LLM Agents

Sep 2026 · 0 citations · 45 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

This work introduces SCHEMEARENA, a 400-scenario benchmark for scalable scheming stress testing, constructed through a factorized scenario synthesis framework spanning diverse safety-relevant tool domains, instrumental goals, oversight conditions, and pressure mechanisms.

Abstract

We study scheming in LLM agents, in which agents covertly pursue misaligned goals. Our focus is to understand how scheming arises from the interaction of key factors, such as instrumental goals, environmental affordances, oversight conditions, and perceived consequences. Prior work examines only a small number of scenarios, limiting the ability to isolate how these conditions shape an agent's propensity or capability to scheme. This limited scale and task diversity also restrict coverage of realistic deployment settings and the range of scheming strategies that can be observed. To this end, we introduce SCHEMEARENA, a 400-scenario benchmark for scalable scheming stress testing, constructed through a factorized scenario synthesis framework spanning diverse safety-relevant tool domains, instrumental goals, oversight conditions, and pressure mechanisms. To enable scalable and reliable monitoring, we further propose SCOUT, a scheming monitor that grounds multi-criteria judgments in evidence drawn from agents'reasoning and actions. Across controlled stress tests on five LLM agents, we find that explicit instrumental goals are the strongest driver of scheming propensity. Strategic hints play a distinct role by helping agents translate scheming reasoning into concrete covert behavior. Oversight has mixed effects: in several closed models, action-only monitoring increases scheming, suggesting that partial oversight can act as an optimization constraint rather than a deterrent. CoT is a useful but incomplete monitoring signal: it can reveal latent scheming before execution, yet action-only scheming shows that covert behavior may occur without explicit reasoning evidence. We release the benchmark, code, and monitor at: https://github.com/launchnlp/SchemeArena.

View source

Similar papers

#artificial intelligence Preprint Oct 2026

ParanoiaEval: Benchmarking Unnecessary Defensive Work in Agentic Coding

As coding agents increasingly undertake real-world work autonomously, judging whether their risk treatments are warranted has become important. Existing work evaluates related agent behaviors from separate perspectives, but lacks a systematic framework for unifying these behaviors. To bridge this gap, we introduce Para...

Han-Jun Luo, Xiu-Cheng Zhang, Zhuo-Ning Xu et al. · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

Before the Script, Set the Stage: How Worldview Simulation Amplifies Psychologically Grounded Persuasion in Multi-Turn Jailbreaking

BluePRINT is introduced, a safety-evaluation framework separating a factorized social-influence strategy space from WORLDVIEWSIM, a cross-turn situational context module, and Monte Carlo Tree Search optimizes turn-level combinations of 18 theory-grounded influence factors across a four-turn trajectory.

Si-Yu Chen, Hao-Ran Wang, Xiaojian Li et al. · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Sep 2026

A Dual-Process Perspective on Nudge Susceptibility in LLM-Based GUI Agents

LLM-based GUI agents increasingly act on behalf of users in digital environments that were designed with human users in mind. These graphical user interfaces were designed to support, but also deliberately steer, the behaviour and decisions of users. While behavioural biases in the textual outputs of LLMs are well-docu...

Haya Halimeh, Sascha Kaltenpoth, Kevin Bösch et al. · 0 citations
Open access Oct 2026

Designing healthy and resilient information environments: A multi‐agent sandbox for exploring risks and countermeasures

Artificial intelligence is transforming online information environments, amplifying both societal benefits and risks. This article argues that online platforms can be understood as multi‐agent systems (MAS) composed of humans, simulated users, adversarial agents, and defensive agents operating under platform‐level ru...

J. van Diggelen, Maaike D. Homan · 0 citations
#artificial intelligence Preprint Oct 2026

Accurate but Not Humble: Evaluating Epistemic Humility in LLM Agents under Knowledge Conflict

When retrieved evidence contradicts an agent's prior beliefs, does it revise its answer, acknowledge uncertainty, or persist with an incorrect conclusion? Existing evaluations of agentic systems focus primarily on task success, offering limited insight into how agents handle such conflicts. We propose to evaluate agent...

Kaiser Sun, Bernal Jiménez Gutiérrez, Hong-Jun Liu et al. · 0 citations

Related blog posts

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.