Believed but Not Said: Measuring Hidden Belief Collapse in Multi-Agent LLM Discussions
What it is
This paper investigates the robustness of multi-agent LLM systems against adversarial influence by simulating discussions where a minority of agents assert false answers. It distinguishes between public agreement and private belief by probing agents' hidden internal states, revealing that while public conformity is low, private belief collapse is high and often invisible in the transcript.
The problem it solves
Current multi-agent safety evaluations typically only measure public agreement, missing the fact that agents may privately adopt false beliefs while publicly maintaining correct stances, leading to a false sense of security.
What you could use it for
- Evaluating the safety of multi-agent debate systems
- Designing defenses against social engineering attacks on LLM agents
- Benchmarking the robustness of LLMs to peer pressure
Read the source ↗Back to the library →
Summary written by an AI model from the source; check the source before you rely on it.