mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Toward Measuring Structural Drift in LLM Communication Loops

arXiv 2604.13061 ↗First posted 18 Mar 2026cs.CL cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models increasingly run in stateful pipelines that assemble each prompt from retrieval, memory, tools, and other agents. Such pipelines drift: information that should shape the next response is dropped, compressed, or misrouted while every component still reports success. Existing diagnostics miss this because they evaluate isolated prompts, responses, or task scores, whereas what decouples is the relation between a prompt and the response it draws. Here we show that treating the prompt to response to next prompt chain as the fundamental unit of analysis makes these relations measurable. We introduce structural communication coherence, quantified by two metrics: communication closure, which asks if what the pipeline returns at one turn matches what it faces next, and normalized conditional action contribution, which measures how much a sent message resolves the subsequent reply. Across 2,171 human to human, 58 human to LLM, and 8 LLM to LLM dialogues, these metrics reveal directional interaction structures; crucially, the measured contribution drops by 87 to 92% when a response is swapped for one from another turn, leaving surrounding prompts untouched. Because this approach requires no labels, healthy reference data, or predefined rules only the raw prompts and responses drift can be defined and measured directly from operational traffic, rather than inferred from eventual task failure. Establishing prospective detection performance is the next step.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 12 of its 47 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 Mar 2026.

Builds on

12 of 47 references.

References · 12

  1. 2023LongBench: A Bilingual, Multitask Benchmark for Long Context Understandingcited by 1,417
  2. 2024RULER: What's the Real Context Size of Your Long-Context Language Models?cited by 1,346
  3. 2024LongBench v2: Towards Deeper Understanding and Reasoning on Realistic Long-context Multitaskscited by 379
  4. 2024∞Bench: Extending Long Context Evaluation Beyond 100K Tokenscited by 367
  5. 2025MemoryBench: A Benchmark for Memory and Continual Learning in LLM Systemscited by 61
  6. 2019The PhotoBook Dataset: Building Common Ground through Visually-Grounded Dialoguecited by 46
  7. 2026Agent Drift: Quantifying Behavioral Degradation in Multi-Agent LLM Systems Over Extended Interactionscited by 28
  8. 2025Drift No More? Context Equilibria in Multi-Turn LLM Interactionscited by 22
  9. 2021Maintaining Common Ground in Dynamic Environmentscited by 9
  10. 2026AgentTrace: A Structured Logging Framework for Agent System Observabilitycited by 9
  11. 2026ContextCov: Deriving and Enforcing Executable Constraints from Agent Instruction Filescited by 6
  12. 2024The Text Classification Pipeline: Starting Shallow going Deepercited by 2

Built on by

Not cited yet.