AI Agent Safety
Overview
AI agent safety asks how to keep systems that plan over multiple steps and use tools, memory, or other agents within authorized and harmless bounds. Researchers test computer-use, coding, web, and embodied agents with prompt-injection, misuse, and long-horizon trajectory benchmarks, measuring executed effects as well as final answers. Approaches include red-teaming and monitoring, safety fine-tuning and refusal training, and runtime controls such as least-privilege access, pre-execution policy gates, sandboxing, human approval, and formal verification. A central challenge is that safety can fail through ambiguous goals, changing context, tool or agent interactions, and pressure over time, while stronger restrictions can block legitimate tasks and assurances may not transfer to deployment.
Latest papers
330 papers47 papers in the last four weeks, up 68% on the four weeks before. 0.3% of all new papers.
Agent Meltdowns: The Road to Hell Is Paved with Helpful Agents
Surviving the Unseen: Predictive Defense for Novel Multi-Turn Multimodal Attacks
LivePI: More Realistic Benchmarking of Agents Against Indirect Prompt Injection
Ethical Hyper-Velocity (EHV): A Hardware-Rooted Zero-Trust Runtime Enforcement Architecture for Agentic AI Systems
Towards trustworthy agentic AI: a comprehensive survey of safety, robustness, privacy, and system security
TClone: Low-Latency Forking of Live GUI Environments for Computer-Use Agents
LiSA: Lifelong Safety Adaptation via Conservative Policy Induction
Conformity Generates Collective Misalignment in AI Agents Societies
Beyond Autonomy: A Dynamic Tiered AgentRunner Framework for Governable and Resilient Enterprise AI Execution
The Authorization-Execution Gap Is a Major Safety and Security Problem in Open-World Agents
A Prompt-Aware Structuring Framework for Reliable Reuse of AI-Generated Content in the Agentic Web
Containment Verification: AI Safety Guarantees Independent of Alignment
Mechanism Design Is Not Enough: Prosocial Agents for Cooperative AI
Playing games with knowledge: AI-Induced delusions need game theoretic interventions
Growth-seekers'' ($θ_G$) and confirmatory Validation-seekers'' (). Under repeated play, this identification failure creates a coordination trap -- analogous to a Prisoner's Dilemma -- where locally rational feedback loops drive users toward pathologically certain false beliefs. We propose an inference-time mechanism design intervention called an Epistemic Mediator that breaks this pooling equilibrium by introducing a costly signal (epistemic friction), forcing type revelation based on users' asymmetric cognitive costs for processing resistance. A key contribution is Belief Versioning, a git-inspired epistemic meta-memory system that stores healthy beliefs and rollbacks when validation-seeking resistance is detected. In simulation, this intervention achieves a separating equilibrium achieving a differential in spiral rates while passing a learning preservation criterion), evidence that epistemic safety in AI is fundamentally a problem of strategic information environment design rather than simple model alignment.