mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

MemRiskBench: Trace-Aware Risk-Preserving Evaluation for Long-Horizon LLM Agents

arXiv 2609.14976 ↗First posted 14 Sep 2026cs.AIcited by 0

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Software engineering coding agents

Abstract (arXiv)

Long-horizon LLM agents accumulate memory across sessions, creating sparse but high-impact risks: stale facts, conflicting updates, cross-user leakage, revoked-memory reuse, and constraint decay. Standard aggregate scores hide per-risk failure rates--a model achieving 78% average accuracy may still leak data in 4% of episodes--and benchmark compression preferentially discards the rare high-severity events that distinguish a mostly-working model from one that occasionally causes harm. We present MemRiskBench. The primary contribution is a five-category risk taxonomy (plus one documented, unscored category) operationalized by deterministic trace grounded checks, instantiated as a 120-episode scripted benchmark with full trace logging and no LLM-as-judge on the pass/fail path, evaluated on five locally run quantized instruction-tuned models. Second, a risk-preserving subset selector: a coverage-constrained greedy selector on deterministic trace-derived features that retains full ranking (Spearman rho = 0.975, deterministic; CI collapses to a point estimate with zero bootstrap variance), risk coverage (1.0), and high-risk model detection (1.0) at a 20% subset size, reducing compute 5x. Unlike ranking-only subset selectors, this selector additionally preserves risk-type coverage and high-risk detection using trace-grounded deterministic features that do not require an LLM judge. All episodes, traces, the scoring implementation, and the selector are released to support reproducible evaluation and risk assessment of deployed LLM agents

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Software engineering coding agents, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 12 of its 18 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 14 Sep 2026.

Builds on

12 of 18 references.

References · 12

  1. 2016Membership Inference Attacks against Machine Learning Modelscited by 2,221
  2. 2020Extracting Training Data from Large Language Modelscited by 2,144
  3. 2023LongBench: A Bilingual, Multitask Benchmark for Long Context Understandingcited by 1,378
  4. 2023MemGPT: Towards LLMs as Operating Systemscited by 1,295
  5. 2024RULER: What's the Real Context Size of Your Long-Context Language Models?cited by 1,270
  6. 2018The Secret Sharer: Evaluating and Testing Unintended Memorization in Neural Networkscited by 847
  7. 2024Evaluating Very Long-Term Conversational Memory of LLM Agentscited by 800
  8. 2024LongMemEval: Benchmarking Chat Assistants on Long-Term Interactive Memorycited by 656
  9. 2021GRAD-MATCH: Gradient Matching based Data Subset Selection for Efficient Deep Model Trainingcited by 269
  10. 2023L-Eval: Instituting Standardized Evaluation for Long Context Language Modelscited by 232
  11. 2024Lessons from the Trenches on Reproducible Evaluation of Language Modelscited by 172
  12. 2023Sociotechnical Safety Evaluation of Generative AI Systemscited by 154

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026TRACE: Trajectory Risk-Aware Compression for Long-Horizon Agent Safety
  2. 2026Remembering More, Risking More: Longitudinal Safety Risks in Memory-Equipped LLM Agents
  3. 2026MemEvoBench: Benchmarking Safety Risks from Memory Misevolution in LLM Agents
  4. 2026MemGuard: Persisting Verifier Signals for LLM-Agent Memory Governance
  5. 2026Automata from Agent Traces: Failure and Next-Step Prediction
  6. 2026PrefixGuard: From LLM-Agent Traces to Online Failure-Warning Monitors
  7. 2026Understanding Stage-Wise Utility-Risk Trade-offs in LLM Agent Memory
  8. 2026Measuring the Unmeasurable: Markov Chain Reliability for LLM Agents