cs.CRJun 18, 2026

NRT-Bench: Benchmarking Multi-Turn Red-Teaming of LLM Operator Agents in Safety-Critical Control Rooms

Authors: Hanwool LeeDasol ChoiBokyeong KimHaon ParkSeung Geun Kim

Organizations: AIM Intelligence · Republic of Korea · KAERI

Abstract

Large language model (LLM) agents are increasingly proposed as supervisory components for safety-critical systems, yet their robustness under sustained, adaptive adversarial pressure remains poorly characterized. We present NRT-Bench, a benchmark for multi-turn red-teaming of LLM agents acting as operators of a safety-critical system, instantiated in a simulated nuclear power plant control room. A five-role operator team, each backed by a configurable LLM, runs a plant governed by six critical safety functions (CSFs), while adversaries inject messages over four channels in bounded multi-turn sessions with per-turn feedback. Harm is an objective signal rather than LLM-judged text: a run terminates the moment any CSF is lost, attributed to the causing message. Evaluating four frontier operator models under a fixed-attack paired-replay protocol, we find that adaptive multi-turn attacks reliably push the operator team past a safety limit: across the four models, between 8.7% and 12.1% of attack sessions end with the plant losing a critical safety function. Although the four models look almost equally robust by this aggregate rate, their failures barely overlap: of 149149 sessions, none defeat all four models while a third defeat at least one, so vulnerabilities are nearly disjoint across models rather than nested. The effect of added defences is strongly model-dependent: the same guardrail stack or safety-advisor agent that lowers attack success for one model can raise it for another. We release the simulation venue, attack dataset, and replay tooling for reproducible safety evaluation of LLM agents.

Explore similar work

Jul 13, 2026cs.CR

AMT-X: Phase-Structured Multi-Turn Red-Teaming with Checklist-Gated Evaluation

Safety evaluation of large language models (LLMs) relies largely on single-turn attack datasets and single-judge scoring, underestimating risk from adaptive multi-turn adversaries and reporting a single success rate that does not separate partially actionable outputs from those carrying complete operational detail. We propose AMT-X (Adaptive Multi-Turn Exploitation), a phase-structured multi-turn red-teaming framework. Unlike prior multi-turn attacks that rely on ad hoc escalation or free-form per-goal plans, AMT-X casts the attack as an explicit, reproducible multi-phase state machine driven by semantic signals from the victim, and replaces single-judge scoring with a multi-role jury whose phase-conditioned checklists gate success on actionable harm. Across six frontier victim models (queried under their default safety alignment, without added moderation layers) and seven Moderation sub-categories, AMT-X attains overall attack success rates of 97.6-100% under a lenient score threshold, but 66.7-78.6% under a stricter gate requiring complete, real, and operational detail: a gap of up to 33 percentage points between partially and fully actionable harm.
Yi Ting Shen, Kentaroh Toyoda, Alex Leung
Aug 11, 2026cs.AI

REDAgentBench: Executable Red Teaming and Faithful Measurement of LLM Agent Systems

Large language model (LLM) agents combine language-based reasoning with external tools to perform complex tasks. Adversarial inputs can exploit interactions between the agent and its environment, causing the agent to violate safety policies during execution. Yet existing evaluations often reduce agent safety to a single attack success rate (ASR), collapsing exposure, execution, observation, and adjudication and potentially conflating actual violations with evidence visibility. We introduce REDAgentBench, an executable framework for autonomous red-teaming and faithful measurement. It derives attacks from explicit safety constraints and associated agent-system vulnerabilities, runs them in isolated service sandboxes, and verifies harmful effects from service receipts and final-state changes. The benchmark contains 1,661 cases across five service surfaces. Across six models and three agent harnesses, macro-average ASR is 65.69%; reported ASR varies with harness and evidence view, while evaluation-context disclosure changes execution behavior. In a state-grounded diagnostic cohort, almost one in five confirmed violations with resolved action anchors occurs after the agent states the relevant constraint or risk, revealing a Recognition--Execution Gap. Finally, a training-free policy reminder reduces confirmed violations by more than 70 percentage points in matched replay. These findings show that executable evaluation can improve safety measurement and identify actionable intervention points.
Zixing Chen, Xingyuan Liu, Jie Zhu +6
Jul 20, 2026cs.CR

Adaptive Adversaries: A Multi-Turn, Multi-LLM Benchmark for LLM Agent Security

LLM-based agents process external content, exposing them to prompt injection and multi-turn manipulation. Most safety benchmarks evaluate defenders against fixed attack pools collected before evaluation, single-turn or multi-turn. We present a 21-scenario benchmark for \emph{adaptive multi-round attacks against memoryless LLM defenders}: an autonomous LLM attacker observes prior defender responses and pivots across rounds, while each defender response is evaluated as a fresh interaction. Holding the 21 scenarios, attackers, defenders, and structured-output scoring fixed, restricting scoring to the first attacker turn yields 00-1%1\% attack success rate (ASR); allowing 15 rounds of adaptive attack yields 5.45.4-14.0%14.0\%. Pooling three frontier attacker LLMs uncovers 1.41.4-2.2×2.2\times as many unique successful attacks as the best single attacker, and the generated attacks have low cosine similarity (0.020.02-0.140.14) to attacks in existing benchmarks. Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.4 are tied in aggregate (5.4%5.4\% each; overlapping 95%95\% CIs), but their weaknesses differ sharply: on one scenario Opus reaches 60%60\% ASR (95%95\% CI 3636--80%80\%) while GPT-5.4 and Gemini each stay at 7%7\% (CI 11-30%30\%; the gap is preserved in a higher-NN replication). 1313 of 2121 scenarios distinguish at least one defender pair, yet rankings disagree across scenarios (Kendall's W=0.19W = 0.19). We release the benchmark -- 21 evaluation scenarios, 10 public development scenarios, the orchestrator, baseline harnesses, and a multi-attacker CLI -- plus 945 transcripts from the 3×\times3 frontier matrix, an attack-replay dataset, and 18{,}422 gpt-oss-20b battles from an open competition's final scoring rounds.
Devina Jain, David Hartmann, Chuan Li