mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Rule Encoding and Compliance in Large Language Models: An Information-Theoretic Analysis

arXiv 2510.05106 ↗First posted 23 Sep 2025cs.AIcited by 2

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

The design of safety-critical agents based on large language models (LLMs) requires more than simple prompt engineering. This paper presents a comprehensive information-theoretic analysis of how rule encodings in system prompts influence attention mechanisms and compliance behaviour. We demonstrate that rule formats with low syntactic entropy and highly concentrated anchors reduce attention entropy and improve pointer fidelity, but reveal a fundamental trade-off between anchor redundancy and attention entropy that previous work failed to recognize. Through formal analysis of multiple attention architectures including causal, bidirectional, local sparse, kernelized, and cross-attention mechanisms, we establish bounds on pointer fidelity and show how anchor placement strategies must account for competing fidelity and entropy objectives. Combining these insights with a dynamic rule verification architecture, we provide a formal proof that hot reloading of verified rule sets increases the asymptotic probability of compliant outputs. These findings underscore the necessity of principled anchor design and dual enforcement mechanisms to protect LLM-based agents against prompt injection attacks while maintaining compliance in evolving domains.

Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 1 of its 3 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 23 Sep 2025.

Builds on

1 of 3 references.

References · 1

  1. 2025Lessons from Defending Gemini Against Indirect Prompt Injectionscited by 43

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

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

2 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2023Evaluating the Instruction-Following Robustness of Large Language Models to Prompt Injection
  2. 2025Design Patterns for Securing LLM Agents against Prompt Injections
  3. 2026Security in the Fine-Tuning Lifecycle of Large Language Models: Threats, Defenses,Evaluation, and Future Directions
  4. 2025Prompt Injection as an Emerging Threat: Evaluating the Resilience of Large Language Models
  5. 2025Understanding and Mitigating Over-refusal for Large Language Models via Representation Intervention
  6. 2026Architecting Secure AI Agents: Perspectives on System-Level Defenses Against Indirect Prompt Injection Attacks
  7. 2026Exposing LLM Safety Gaps Through Mathematical Encoding:New Attacks and Systematic Analysis
  8. 2026From Storage to Steering: Memory Control Flow Attacks on LLM Agents