CORTEXA
← Browse
arxivcs.AIcs.CRcs.LG2026-07-21

ResearchArena: Evaluating Sabotage and Monitoring in Automated AI R&D

Lena Libon, Ben Rank, Jehyeok Yeon, David Schmotz, Jeremy Qin, Daniel Donnelly, Derck Prinzhorn, Maksym Andriushchenko

As AI agents begin to automate AI R&D, we need ways to assess whether their outputs are safe to deploy, even when the agents themselves may be untrusted. AI control offers one such approach: rather than trusting the agent, it treats it as a potential adversary and uses a monitor to detect covert sabotage before deployment. We evaluate AI control for automated AI R&D with ResearchArena, a framework spanning four long-horizon tasks: safety post-training, capabilities post-training, CUDA-kernel optimization, and inference-server optimization. Because the deliverable in AI R&D is an artifact that will be deployed and run, we pair each main task with two kinds of hidden side task: an embedded side task that sabotages the submitted model, adapter, kernel, or server itself, and an independent side task that takes a covert out-of-scope action in the sandbox while leaving the artifact honest. We evaluate frontier agents at both sabotage and monitoring, across four monitor types that vary along two axes: whether the monitor may execute and probe the produced artifact, and whether it sees the agent's chain-of-thought. We find that sabotage hidden in the training data is the hardest to catch, flagged fewer than half the time. Letting the monitor run experiments on the artifact, rather than only read the trajectory, helps, but it is not enough: monitors still miss embedded sabotage by inspecting only the surface, by noticing the anomaly but explaining it away, or by probing the artifact with the wrong test. We release ResearchArena as a modular framework for evaluating sabotage and control in automated AI R&D.

View free PDFSource page

Related papers

arxivcs.LGcs.AIcs.CR2026-07-15

Value Leakage: An LLM's Answers Are Silently Shaped by Its Own Values

Jan Betley, Johannes Treutlein, Jan Dubiński, Harry Mayne, Karol Gałązka, Niels Warncke, et al.

People use language models for practical questions whose answers are difficult to verify. We show that models exhibit covert value leakage: the information they provide is influenced by their own values, without this influence being disclosed to the user. In one of our evaluation…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.SEcs.AIcs.CRcs.IRcs.LG2026-07-18

How Do You Choose Your AI Component? An Interview Study of Secure AI Integration in Practice

Mahzabin Tamanna, Elizabeth Lin, Sparsha Gowda, Laurie Williams, Dominik Wermke

The increasing adoption of Large Language Models (LLMs) as AI components in modern software systems introduces distinct security risks to the software supply chain. While many considerations and safety mechanisms are in place for components of the traditional software supply chai…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.CRcs.AIcs.LG2026-07-01

Generative AI and Federated Learning for Intrusion Detection Systems: A Survey

Jiefei Liu, Abu Saleh Md Tayeen, Pratyay Kumar, Qixu Gong, Wenbin Jiang, Huiping Cao, et al.

Intrusion Detection Systems (IDSs) are essential for monitoring network traffic and identifying malicious activities in modern cyber-physical, Internet of Things (IoT), enterprise, and distributed network environments. However, developing reliable IDS models remains challenging b…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.ROcs.AIcs.CRcs.LG2026-07-20

Reasoning as a Double-Edged Sword: Architecture and Cross-Stage Robustness in Vision-Language-Action Models

Tuan Duong Trinh, Naveed Akhtar, Basim Azam

Does adding a reasoning step make a Vision-Language-Action (VLA) model more robust to perturbation? Intuitively, a policy that reasons before acting should absorb a perturbed input better than one that maps observations directly to actions. We test this premise head-on across thr…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.AIcs.CRcs.LG2026-07-22

Know Your Agent: Reconnaissance-Driven Pentesting of AI Agents

Or Zion Eliav, Eyal Lenga, Shir Bernstien, Yisroel Mirsky

Traditional pentesting uses reconnaissance at each step to uncover unseen weaknesses, build stronger attacks, and advance the objective; we argue that AI agents require the same treatment. We formalize agent reconnaissance by modeling the process and identifying the knowledge ass…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.CRcs.AIcs.HCcs.LG2026-07-03

PromptPET: Privacy-Utility Optimized Prompt Obfuscation

Ke Yang, Olivia Figueira, Umar Iqbal, Athina Markopoulou

Privacy is an important challenge when users interact with AI chatbots, since users may share sensitive information, explicitly or implicitly, and AI chatbots can use this information for user profiling. In this paper, we aim to protect user privacy via a user-side mechanism that…

View free PDFSource page