mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

RADAR: A Risk-Aware Dynamic Multi-Agent Framework for LLM Safety Evaluation via Role-Specialized Collaboration

arXiv 2509.25271 ↗First posted 28 Sep 2025cs.AI cs.CV cs.LGcited by 4

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Agent threats, guardrails and governance

also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)

Existing safety evaluation methods for large language models (LLMs) suffer from inherent limitations, including evaluator bias and detection failures arising from model homogeneity, which collectively undermine the robustness of risk evaluation processes. This paper seeks to re-examine the risk evaluation paradigm by introducing a theoretical framework that reconstructs the underlying risk concept space. Specifically, we decompose the latent risk concept space into three mutually exclusive subspaces: the explicit risk subspace (encompassing direct violations of safety guidelines), the implicit risk subspace (capturing potential malicious content that requires contextual reasoning for identification), and the non-risk subspace. Furthermore, we propose RADAR, a multi-agent collaborative evaluation framework that leverages multi-round debate mechanisms through four specialized complementary roles and employs dynamic update mechanisms to achieve self-evolution of risk concept distributions. This approach enables comprehensive coverage of both explicit and implicit risks while mitigating evaluator bias. To validate the effectiveness of our framework, we construct an evaluation dataset comprising 800 challenging cases. Extensive experiments on our challenging testset and public benchmarks demonstrate that RADAR significantly outperforms baseline evaluation methods across multiple dimensions, including accuracy, stability, and self-evaluation risk sensitivity. Notably, RADAR achieves a 28.87% improvement in risk identification accuracy compared to the strongest baseline evaluation method.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 43 of its 53 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Sep 2025.

Builds on

43 of 53 references.

References · 43

  1. 2025DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learningcited by 6,330
  2. 2023Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learningcited by 4,276
  3. 2023Universal and Transferable Adversarial Attacks on Aligned Language Modelscited by 3,104
  4. 2024Qwen2 Technical Reportcited by 2,120
  5. 2023MetaGPT: Meta Programming for A Multi-Agent Collaborative Frameworkcited by 1,808
  6. 2023Jailbroken: How Does LLM Safety Training Fail?cited by 1,651
  7. 2024HarmBench: A Standardized Evaluation Framework for Automated Red Teaming and Robust Refusalcited by 1,429
  8. 2023Jailbreaking Black Box Large Language Models in Twenty Queriescited by 1,420
  9. 2023Fine-tuning Aligned Language Models Compromises Safety, Even When Users Do Not Intend To!cited by 1,154
  10. 2023Encouraging Divergent Thinking in Large Language Models through Multi-Agent Debatecited by 1,011
  11. 2021An Explanation of In-context Learning as Implicit Bayesian Inferencecited by 938
  12. 2023AutoDAN: Generating Stealthy Jailbreak Prompts on Aligned Large Language Modelscited by 785
31 more
  1. 2023ChatEval: Towards Better LLM-based Evaluators through Multi-Agent Debatecited by 742
  2. 2022Red Teaming Language Models to Reduce Harms: Methods, Scaling Behaviors, and Lessons Learnedcited by 729
  3. 2023Tree of Attacks: Jailbreaking Black-Box LLMs Automaticallycited by 672
  4. 2023AgentVerse: Facilitating Multi-Agent Collaboration and Exploring Emergent Behaviorscited by 598
  5. 2023GPTFUZZER: Red Teaming Large Language Models with Auto-Generated Jailbreak Promptscited by 560
  6. 2024Jailbreaking Leading Safety-Aligned LLMs with Simple Adaptive Attackscited by 486
  7. 2023Jailbreak and Guard Aligned Language Models with Only Few In-Context Demonstrationscited by 431
  8. 2023GPT-4 Is Too Smart To Be Safe: Stealthy Chat with LLMs via Ciphercited by 423
  9. 2023RLHF-V: Towards Trustworthy MLLMs via Behavior Alignment from Fine-grained Correctional Human Feedbackcited by 412
  10. 2023DeepInception: Hypnotize Large Language Model to Be Jailbreakercited by 367
  11. 2024Debating with More Persuasive LLMs Leads to More Truthful Answerscited by 266
  12. 2023A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing: Generalized Nested Jailbreak Prompts can Fool Large Language Models Easilycited by 259
  13. 2024ShieldGemma: Generative AI Content Moderation Based on Gemmacited by 243
  14. 2023Multilingual Jailbreak Challenges in Large Language Modelscited by 240
  15. 2024ArtPrompt: ASCII Art-based Jailbreak Attacks against Aligned LLMscited by 216
  16. 2024Rethinking the Bounds of LLM Reasoning: Are Multi-Agent Discussions the Key?cited by 159
  17. 2024AdvPrompter: Fast Adaptive Adversarial Prompting for LLMscited by 156
  18. 2023Can ChatGPT Defend its Belief in Truth? Evaluating LLM Reasoning via Debatecited by 94
  19. 2025MM-RLHF: The Next Step Forward in Multimodal LLM Alignmentcited by 83
  20. 2024Does Refusal Training in LLMs Generalize to the Past Tense?cited by 79
  21. 2021On the Safety of Conversational Models: Taxonomy, Dataset, and Benchmarkcited by 73
  22. 2024Uncovering Safety Risks of Large Language Models through Concept Activation Vectorcited by 67
  23. 2023Unveiling the Implicit Toxicity in Large Language Modelscited by 51
  24. 2024ShieldLM: Empowering LLMs as Aligned, Customizable and Explainable Safety Detectorscited by 51
  25. 2023Debate Helps Supervise Unreliable Expertscited by 43
  26. 2024Defensive Prompt Patch: A Robust and Interpretable Defense of LLMs against Jailbreak Attackscited by 37
  27. 2024LLM Harmony: Multi-Agent Communication for Problem Solvingcited by 35
  28. 2024AttackEval: How to Evaluate the Effectiveness of Jailbreak Attacking on Large Language Modelscited by 28
  29. 2025Align-Pro: A Principled Approach to Prompt Optimization for LLM Alignmentcited by 18
  30. 2025AISafetyLab: A Comprehensive Framework for AI Safety Evaluation and Improvementcited by 12
  31. 2024Harnessing Task Overload for Scalable Jailbreak Attacks on Large Language Modelscited by 4

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 3; 2026: 1.

4 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2024R-Judge: Benchmarking Safety Risk Awareness for LLM Agents
  2. 2025Beyond Reactive Safety: Risk-Aware LLM Alignment via Long-Horizon Simulation
  3. 2026Risky-Bench: Probing Agentic Safety Risks under Real-World Deployment
  4. 2025AgenticEval: Toward Agentic and Self-Evolving Safety Evaluation of Large Language Models
  5. 2025Efficient LLM Safety Evaluation through Multi-Agent Debate
  6. 2024Agent-SafetyBench: Evaluating the Safety of LLM Agents
  7. 2025LLM-Safety Evaluations Lack Robustness
  8. 2024S-Eval: Towards Automated and Comprehensive Safety Evaluation for Large Language Models