arXiv:2602.22227v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Despite their impressive capabilities, Multimodal Large Language Models (MLLMs) exhibit perceptual fragility when confronted with visually complex scenes. This weakness stems from a reliance on finite training datasets, which are prohibitively expensive to scale and impose a ceiling on model robustness. We introduce \textbf{AOT-SFT}, a large-scale adversarial dataset for bootstrapping MLLM robustness. Building on this, we propose \textbf{AOT (Adversarial Opponent Training)}, a self-play framework that forges MLLM robustness by creating its own training data. Our method orchestrates a co-evolution between an image-editing Attacker and a Defender MLLM, where the Attacker generates a diverse and dynamic curriculum of image manipulations, forcing the Defender to adapt and improve. Extensive experiments demonstrate that AOT enhances the Defender's perceptual robustness and reduces hallucinations, establishing a scalable paradigm for training more reliable MLLMs.

arXiv:2501.17860v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Current medical AI systems often fail to replicate real-world clinical reasoning, as they are predominantly trained and evaluated on static text and question-answer tasks. These tuning methods and benchmarks overlook critical aspects like evidence-based reasoning and handling distracting information. To bridge this gap, we introduce a novel benchmark that simulates real-world diagnostic scenarios, integrating noise and difficulty levels aligned with USMLE standards. Moreover, we explore dialogue-based fine-tuning, which transforms static datasets into conversational formats to better capture iterative reasoning processes. Experiments show that dialogue-tuned models outperform traditional methods, with improvements of $9.64\%$ in multi-round reasoning scenarios and $6.18\%$ in accuracy in a noisy environment. Our findings highlight dialogue tuning as a promising approach for advancing clinically aligned and robust medical AI systems.

arXiv:2602.14364v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Clawdbot is a self-hosted, tool-using personal AI agent with a broad action space spanning local execution and web-mediated workflows, which raises heightened safety and security concerns under ambiguity and adversarial steering. We present a trajectory-centric evaluation of Clawdbot across six risk dimensions. Our test suite samples and lightly adapts scenarios from prior agent-safety benchmarks (including ATBench and LPS-Bench) and supplements them with hand-designed cases tailored to Clawdbot's tool surface. We log complete interaction trajectories (messages, actions, tool-call arguments/outputs) and assess safety using both an automated trajectory judge (AgentDoG-Qwen3-4B) and human review. Across 34 canonical cases, we find a non-uniform safety profile: performance is generally consistent on reliability-focused tasks, while most failures arise under underspecified intent, open-ended goals, or benign-seeming jailbreak prompts, where minor misinterpretations can escalate into higher-impact tool actions. We supplemented the overall results with representative case studies and summarized the commonalities of these cases, analyzing the security vulnerabilities and typical failure modes that Clawdbot is prone to trigger in practice.

arXiv:2601.20538v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language model-powered multi-agent systems have emerged as powerful tools for simulating complex human-like systems. The interactions within these systems often lead to extreme events whose origins remain obscured by the black box of emergence. Interpreting these events is critical for system safety. This paper proposes the first framework for explaining emergent extreme events in multi-agent systems, aiming to answer three fundamental questions: When does the event originate? Who drives it? And what behaviors contribute to it? Specifically, we adapt the Shapley value to faithfully attribute the occurrence of extreme events to each action taken by agents at different time steps, i.e., assigning an attribution score to the action to measure its influence on the event. We then aggregate the attribution scores along the dimensions of time, agent, and behavior to quantify the risk contribution of each dimension. Finally, we design a set of metrics based on these contribution scores to characterize the features of extreme events. Experiments across diverse multi-agent system scenarios (economic, financial, and social) demonstrate the effectiveness of our framework and provide general insights into the emergence of extreme phenomena.