Skip to content

Translation in progress Some entries still include text in the original language.

#arXiv

Indexed today 126 items

Page 8 Newer contentBack to latest

Oct 12Mon
Oct 11Sun
  1. The Decoder · Indexed · Original News50

    arXiv limits submissions to two papers per person per month, responding to the flood of AI papers hitting the preprint server(original, opens in a new tab)

    arXiv will tighten its submission limit to two papers per person per calendar month starting October 1, 2026, because AI tools have pushed monthly submissions past 40,000 papers. In September 2026 the platform received 40,363 submissions, compared with 20,569 in September 2024 and 9,869 in September 2016; the cs.AI category grew more than sixfold over two years and generated nearly 9,000 support tickets. The new rule applies to all categories and only to submitters; co-authors are not affected. Rejected papers still count toward the limit, while deletion before publication returns the quota. Thomas G. Dietterich, chair of the editorial advisory committee, said a small number of authors submit large volumes of low-quality papers, taking up too much of reviewers' time. arXiv calls this a temporary measure and plans to use newly obtained funding for technical upgrades to handle AI-generated content.

    1 reports ·1 sourcesView the event timeline and all reports
Oct 10Sat
  1. Owain Evans · Indexed · Original X59

    Owain Evans interprets a new paper: LLMs can subconsciously transfer complex traits such as backdoors and reward hacking(original, opens in a new tab)

    Owain Evans introduced his team's new paper on X, stating that models can transfer more complex traits through subliminal learning, including new capabilities not present in pretraining, improvements to existing capabilities, backdoors, and reward hacking in agent scenarios. Previously, the original paper by Cloud et al. only showed models transferring a preference for owls through number sequences, as well as partial transfer of a malicious personality and MNIST skills. The authors listed three limitations: the traits studied were artificially constructed rather than real-world misalignment; some experiments used training setups slightly different from typical distillation; and traits only transferred partially. The authors considered these limitations important but said the conclusions still matter, because worse hyperparameters usually only reduce transfer rather than eliminating it entirely—if a teacher model has a 90% probability of severe harmful behavior in a specific context, the student model might still have a 0.5% probability.

    Why it was selectedThe author, in the first person, lays out the conclusions of the new paper and three important limitations, and explains why partial transfer may still pose real-world risks.

    1 reports ·1 sourcesView the event timeline and all reports
  2. Hugging Face Daily Papers · Indexed · Original Paper55

    Study reconstructs the replication supply chain network of Agent skills on GitHub(original, opens in a new tab)

    Reconstruct the agent skill replication network and model source selection to guide security audits.

    Why it was selectedThe paper reconstructs the copy network of agent skills using git history and provides a reusable repository audit ranking method, allowing security teams to decide which repositories to review first.

Oct 9Fri
  1. 论文追踪 · Indexed · Original Paper56

    Redwood Research proposes the distillation double bind: using distillation to make models confess hidden behavior or inherit only capabilities(original, opens in a new tab)

    Proposes DFI and DFC distillation to convict teachers that conceal mismatches or safely extract capabilities.

    Why it was selectedThe paper splits distillation into two uses, validates with the AuditBench secret-keeping model that students are more likely than teachers to confess hidden behaviors, and provides a comparison of interventions that preserve capability while suppressing trait transfer.

  2. 论文追踪 · Indexed · Original Paper53

    Oxford et al. release the TRAP benchmark: six frontier models' web agents are hijacked by prompt injection on average 25% of the time(original, opens in a new tab)

    Researchers at the University of Oxford and other institutions built the TRAP benchmark to evaluate how web agents are hijacked by interface prompt injection.

    Why it was selectedTRAP decomposes prompt injection into modules such as persuasion principles, manipulation techniques, and interface forms, quantifying the impact of interface details on the probability of web agents being hijacked.

  3. 论文追踪 · Indexed · Original Paper54

    Meta et al. release the WASP benchmark for end-to-end evaluation of prompt injection attacks on web agents.(original, opens in a new tab)

    Researchers at Meta FAIR and other institutions proposed the web agent prompt injection benchmark WASP and evaluated security end-to-end.

    Why it was selectedWASP end-to-end measures prompt injection risk for web agents in self-hosted GitLab and Reddit environments, and provides the gap between hijack rate and attack completion rate.

  4. 论文追踪 · Indexed · Original Paper59

    Scale AI and CMU release BrowserART: refusal-trained LLMs acting as browser agents are highly vulnerable to jailbreaking(original, opens in a new tab)

    Researchers from Scale AI and Carnegie Mellon University and other institutions propose BrowserART to evaluate the generalization of refusal training to browser agents.

    Why it was selectedThe paper gives concrete gaps in refusal between browser agents and the underlying models, and releases a reusable red-teaming test set, suitable for evaluating agent deployment risks.