mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Adversarial Moral Stress Testing of Large Language Models

arXiv 2604.01108 ↗First posted 1 Apr 2026cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Evaluating the ethical robustness of large language models (LLMs) deployed in software systems remains challenging, particularly under sustained adversarial user interaction. Existing safety benchmarks typically rely on single-round evaluations and aggregate metrics, such as toxicity scores and refusal rates, which offer limited visibility into behavioral instability that may arise during realistic multi-turn interactions. As a result, rare but high-impact ethical failures and progressive degradation effects may remain undetected prior to deployment. This paper introduces Adversarial Moral Stress Testing (AMST), a stress-based evaluation framework for assessing ethical robustness under adversarial multi-round interactions. AMST applies structured stress transformations to prompts and evaluates model behavior through distribution-aware robustness metrics that capture variance, tail risk, and temporal behavioral drift across interaction rounds. We evaluate AMST on several state-of-the-art LLMs, including LLaMA-3-8B, GPT-4o, and DeepSeek-v3, using a large set of adversarial scenarios generated under controlled stress conditions. The results demonstrate substantial differences in robustness profiles across models and expose degradation patterns that are not observable under conventional single-round evaluation protocols. In particular, robustness has been shown to depend on distributional stability and tail behavior rather than on average performance alone. Additionally, AMST provides a scalable and model-agnostic stress-testing methodology that enables robustness-aware evaluation and monitoring of LLM-enabled software systems operating in adversarial environments.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 16 of its 31 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Apr 2026.

Builds on

16 of 31 references.

References · 16

  1. 2024HarmBench: A Standardized Evaluation Framework for Automated Red Teaming and Robust Refusalcited by 1,330
  2. 2020RealToxicityPrompts: Evaluating Neural Toxic Degeneration in Language Modelscited by 1,235
  3. 2022Red Teaming Language Models to Reduce Harms: Methods, Scaling Behaviors, and Lessons Learnedcited by 702
  4. 2023DecodingTrust: A Comprehensive Assessment of Trustworthiness in GPT Modelscited by 505
  5. 2024JailbreakBench: An Open Robustness Benchmark for Jailbreaking Large Language Modelscited by 494
  6. 2025From System 1 to System 2: A Survey of Reasoning Large Language Modelscited by 319
  7. 2024Tool Learning with Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 221
  8. 2023PromptRobust: Towards Evaluating the Robustness of Large Language Models on Adversarial Promptscited by 218
  9. 2025A Survey of Scientific Large Language Models: From Data Foundations to Agent Frontierscited by 34
  10. 2024Navigating LLM Ethics: Advancements, Challenges, and Future Directionscited by 28
  11. 2024Deconstructing The Ethics of Large Language Models from Long-standing Issues to New-emerging Dilemmas: A Surveycited by 23
  12. 2024Towards Trustworthy AI: A Review of Ethical and Robust Large Language Modelscited by 21
4 more
  1. 2025Towards Embodied Agentic AI: Review and Classification of LLM- and VLM-Driven Robot Autonomy and Interactioncited by 18
  2. 2025Reasoning Path Divergence: A New Metric and Curation Strategy to Unlock LLM Diverse Thinkingcited by 10
  3. 2025Large Language Models for Subjective Language Understanding: A Surveycited by 9
  4. 2025The Moral Consistency Pipeline: Continuous Ethical Evaluation for Large Language Modelscited by 2

Built on by

Not cited yet.