Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2610.02413

Prompted to Discriminate: Generalizing Malicious-Input Probes in the Wild

Elad David·Max Fomin
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

LLM agents increasingly rely on activation probes as runtime monitors for prompt injection, jailbreaks, and unsafe requests, reading the model's own hidden state to catch a harmful input before the agent acts on it. A cheap, increasingly common move, borrowed from LLM-as-judge prompting, is to append a short classification instruction after the user's turn and read the probe at that point, to sharpen it: the instruction asks the model to represent the incoming request as a class, concentrating the signal the probe must separate, at negligible serving cost. But does the wording of that suffix matter, and does its benefit hold in the wild, on attack types the probe never saw in training, the regime a deployed monitor faces? We test this with a controlled ladder of post-user suffixes under strict leave-one-dataset-out (LODO) evaluation across 13 safety benchmarks (jailbreak, injection, and benign chat) and three open-weight model families (Llama-3.1-8B, Qwen3.5-9B, Gemma-4-12B). On a single-position probe, a classification suffix consistently improves out-of-distribution detection over no suffix (up to ~4 AUC points); yet which suffix matters: prompting the model to classify the input, even into content-free labels, reliably wins; an off-topic or merely-attentive suffix helps little. The gain comes from the classification format, not the named criterion: a content-free suffix matches the real malicious/benign one, with the criterion adding precision only at strict thresholds. This is not an artifact of the single-position read: the benefit carries to the multi-position pooling probes used in production (attention, multi-max, MLP), though the best-performing suffix there is readout-dependent. Served through a KV-cache fork, it is a cheap drop-in for any activation-probe monitor, though not an automatic win: which suffix helps, and by how much, depends on the model and the readout.

Explore related subjects

cs.LG

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Elad David, Max Fomin. 2026-10-01. Prompted to Discriminate: Generalizing Malicious-Input Probes in the Wild. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.02413

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Robust Adversarial Quantification via Conflict-Aware Evidential Deep Learning

Reliability of deep learning models is critical for deployment in high-stakes applications, where out-of-distribution or adversarial inputs may lead to detrimental outcomes. Evidential Deep Learning, an efficient paradigm for uncertainty quantification, models predictions as Dirichlet distributions of a single forward pass. However, EDL is particularly vulnerable to adversarially perturbed inputs, making overconfident errors. Conflict-aware Evidential Deep Learning~\mbox{(C-EDL)} is a lightweight post-hoc uncertainty quantification approach that mitigates these issues, enhancing adversarial and OOD robustness without retraining. C-EDL generates diverse, task-preserving transformations per input and quantifies representational disagreement to calibrate uncertainty estimates when needed. C-EDL's conflict-aware prediction adjustment improves detection of OOD and adversarial inputs, maintaining high in-distribution accuracy and low computational overhead. Our experimental evaluation shows that C-EDL significantly outperforms state-of-the-art EDL variants and competitive baselines, achieving substantial reductions in coverage for OOD data (up to $\approx55\%$) and adversarial data (up to $\approx90\%$), across a range of datasets, attack types, and uncertainty metrics.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

Differential Privacy as a Perk: Federated Learning over Multiple-Access Fading Channels with a Multi-Antenna Base Station

Federated Learning (FL) is a distributed learning paradigm that preserves privacy by eliminating the need to exchange raw data during training. In its prototypical edge instantiation with underlying wireless transmissions enabled by analog over-the-air computing (AirComp), referred to as \emph{over-the-air FL (AirFL)}, the inherent channel noise plays a unique role of \emph{frenemy} in the sense that it degrades training due to noisy global aggregation while providing a natural source of randomness for privacy-preserving mechanisms, formally quantified by \emph{differential privacy (DP)}. It remains, nevertheless, challenging to effectively harness such channel impairments, as prior arts, under assumptions of either simple channel models or restricted types of loss functions, mostly considering (local) DP enhancement with a single-round or non-convergent bound on privacy loss. In this paper, we study AirFL over multiple-access fading channels with a multi-antenna base station (BS) subject to user-level DP requirements. Despite a recent study, which claimed in similar settings that artificial noise (AN) must be injected to ensure DP in general, we demonstrate, on the contrary, that DP can be gained as a \emph{perk} even \emph{without} employing any AN. Specifically, we derive a novel bound on DP that converges under general bounded-domain assumptions on model parameters, along with a convergence bound with general smooth and non-convex loss functions. Next, we optimize over receive beamforming and power allocations to characterize the optimal convergence-privacy trade-offs, which also reveal explicit conditions in which DP is achievable without compromising training. Finally, our theoretical findings are validated by extensive numerical results.

cs.LG↗
arXiv2026

Demystifying LLM-as-a-Judge: Analytically Tractable Model for Inference-Time Scaling

Recent developments in large language models have shown advantages in reallocating a notable share of computational resource from training time to inference time. However, the principles behind inference time scaling are not well understood. In this paper, we introduce an analytically tractable model of inference-time scaling: Bayesian linear regression with a reward-weighted sampler, where the reward is determined from a linear model, modeling LLM-as-a-judge scenario. We study this problem in the high-dimensional regime, where the deterministic equivalents dictate a closed-form expression for the posterior predictive mean and variance. We analyze the generalization error when training data are sampled from a teacher model. We draw $k$ inference-time samples and select via softmax at a temperature applied to a quadratic reward. When the reward is not too different from the teacher, the generalization error decreases monotonically with increasing inference time samples $k$. However, the specific reward that optimizes inference-time selection generally differs from the teacher. In contrast, substantial reward misspecification induces a finite optimal $k$ beyond which more sampling can increase the generalization error. For fixed $k$, there exists an optimal sampling temperature. We experimentally verify these facts in large language model inference with an additional large language model as a judge. In the "best-of-$k$" limit with the teacher as reward, we theoretically show that the generalization error decays as $Θ(1/k^2)$ and determine the leading coefficient via extreme value theory. These formulas delineate domains where scaling inference-time computation is provably preferable to collecting more data. Finally, we demonstrate that when task difficulty increases, the previously mentioned advantage of inference-time compute degrades.

cs.LG↗