Tongxin Yuan

CL
h-index3
3papers
349citations
Novelty38%
AI Score36

3 Papers

19.8CLAug 5, 2024Code
Caution for the Environment: Multimodal LLM Agents are Susceptible to Environmental Distractions

Xinbei Ma, Yiting Wang, Yao Yao et al.

This paper investigates the faithfulness of multimodal large language model (MLLM) agents in a graphical user interface (GUI) environment, aiming to address the research question of whether multimodal GUI agents can be distracted by environmental context. A general scenario is proposed where both the user and the agent are benign, and the environment, while not malicious, contains unrelated content. A wide range of MLLMs are evaluated as GUI agents using a simulated dataset, following three working patterns with different levels of perception. Experimental results reveal that even the most powerful models, whether generalist agents or specialist GUI agents, are susceptible to distractions. While recent studies predominantly focus on the helpfulness of agents, our findings first indicate that these agents are prone to environmental distractions. Furthermore, we implement an adversarial environment injection and analyze the approach to improve faithfulness, calling for a collective focus on this important topic.

32.9CLJan 18, 2024Code
R-Judge: Benchmarking Safety Risk Awareness for LLM Agents

Tongxin Yuan, Zhiwei He, Lingzhong Dong et al.

Large language models (LLMs) have exhibited great potential in autonomously completing tasks across real-world applications. Despite this, these LLM agents introduce unexpected safety risks when operating in interactive environments. Instead of centering on the harmlessness of LLM-generated content in most prior studies, this work addresses the imperative need for benchmarking the behavioral safety of LLM agents within diverse environments. We introduce R-Judge, a benchmark crafted to evaluate the proficiency of LLMs in judging and identifying safety risks given agent interaction records. R-Judge comprises 569 records of multi-turn agent interaction, encompassing 27 key risk scenarios among 5 application categories and 10 risk types. It is of high-quality curation with annotated safety labels and risk descriptions. Evaluation of 11 LLMs on R-Judge shows considerable room for enhancing the risk awareness of LLMs: The best-performing model, GPT-4o, achieves 74.42% while no other models significantly exceed the random. Moreover, we reveal that risk awareness in open agent scenarios is a multi-dimensional capability involving knowledge and reasoning, thus challenging for LLMs. With further experiments, we find that fine-tuning on safety judgment significantly improve model performance while straightforward prompting mechanisms fail. R-Judge is publicly available at https://github.com/Lordog/R-Judge.

18.3CYFeb 6, 2024
Risks of AI Scientists: Prioritizing Safeguarding Over Autonomy

Xiangru Tang, Qiao Jin, Kunlun Zhu et al.

AI scientists powered by large language models have demonstrated substantial promise in autonomously conducting experiments and facilitating scientific discoveries across various disciplines. While their capabilities are promising, these agents also introduce novel vulnerabilities that require careful consideration for safety. However, there has been limited comprehensive exploration of these vulnerabilities. This perspective examines vulnerabilities in AI scientists, shedding light on potential risks associated with their misuse, and emphasizing the need for safety measures. We begin by providing an overview of the potential risks inherent to AI scientists, taking into account user intent, the specific scientific domain, and their potential impact on the external environment. Then, we explore the underlying causes of these vulnerabilities and provide a scoping review of the limited existing works. Based on our analysis, we propose a triadic framework involving human regulation, agent alignment, and an understanding of environmental feedback (agent regulation) to mitigate these identified risks. Furthermore, we highlight the limitations and challenges associated with safeguarding AI scientists and advocate for the development of improved models, robust benchmarks, and comprehensive regulations.