Chengyu Song

Chengyu Song, Linru Ma, Jianming Zheng et al.

Log-based insider threat detection (ITD) detects malicious user activities by auditing log entries. Recently, large language models (LLMs) with strong common sense knowledge have emerged in the domain of ITD. Nevertheless, diverse activity types and overlong log files pose a significant challenge for LLMs in directly discerning malicious ones within myriads of normal activities. Furthermore, the faithfulness hallucination issue from LLMs aggravates its application difficulty in ITD, as the generated conclusion may not align with user commands and activity context. In response to these challenges, we introduce Audit-LLM, a multi-agent log-based insider threat detection framework comprising three collaborative agents: (i) the Decomposer agent, breaking down the complex ITD task into manageable sub-tasks using Chain-of-Thought (COT) reasoning;(ii) the Tool Builder agent, creating reusable tools for sub-tasks to overcome context length limitations in LLMs; and (iii) the Executor agent, generating the final detection conclusion by invoking constructed tools. To enhance conclusion accuracy, we propose a pair-wise Evidence-based Multi-agent Debate (EMAD) mechanism, where two independent Executors iteratively refine their conclusions through reasoning exchange to reach a consensus. Comprehensive experiments conducted on three publicly available ITD datasets-CERT r4.2, CERT r5.2, and PicoDomain-demonstrate the superiority of our method over existing baselines and show that the proposed EMAD significantly improves the faithfulness of explanations generated by LLMs.

Trishna Chakraborty, Udita Ghosh, Xiaopan Zhang et al.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly being adopted as the cognitive core of embodied agents. However, inherited hallucinations, which stem from failures to ground user instructions in the observed physical environment, can lead to navigation errors, such as searching for a refrigerator that does not exist. In this paper, we present the first systematic study of hallucinations in LLM-based embodied agents performing long-horizon tasks under scene-task inconsistencies. Our goal is to understand to what extent hallucinations occur, what types of inconsistencies trigger them, and how current models respond. To achieve these goals, we construct a hallucination probing set by building on an existing benchmark, capable of inducing hallucination rates up to 40x higher than base prompts. Evaluating 12 models across two simulation environments, we find that while models exhibit reasoning, they fail to resolve scene-task inconsistencies-highlighting fundamental limitations in handling infeasible tasks. We also provide actionable insights on ideal model behavior for each scenario, offering guidance for developing more robust and reliable planning strategies.