Skip to content

EvoFlint: An Evolutionary Atlas of Multi-Turn LLM Vulnerabilities

Aug 2026 · 0 citations · 24 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

This work argues that red-teaming is better framed as a search problem: discover, organize, and iteratively refine a diverse archive of attack strategies, producing a structured map of how a target model fails rather than a list of one-off successes.

Abstract

Frontier language models that refuse harmful single-turn prompts often comply when the same intent is reached gradually over many turns, making multi-turn attacks one of the least understood failure modes of large language models. Most automated red-teaming methods treat this as a generation problem: produce attacks that break the model. We argue it is better framed as a search problem: discover, organize, and iteratively refine a diverse archive of attack strategies, producing a structured map of how a target model fails rather than a list of one-off successes. We introduce EvoFlint, which applies evolutionary quality-diversity search to multi-turn red-teaming. Attack strategies are phased conversation plans, not raw prompts, and are evolved through LLM-driven mutation and crossover. A Pareto fitness over attack success rate and peak severity preserves selection signal from near-miss attacks. A risk-indexed archive runs novelty search with local competition over strategy description embeddings inside each cell, maintaining diversity without committing to a predefined style taxonomy. A generation-level memory accumulates target-model insights across the population and feeds them back into strategy generation. On the HarmBench-test split, EvoFlint reaches attack success rates of 35.8% on Claude Sonnet 4.6, 59.7% on GPT-5.4, and 94.3% on Qwen3-32B, alongside 98.7% on the older GPT-4o included as a baseline reference. The resulting archive, organized by risk category, exposes for each target which categories of harm its safety training has and has not covered.

View source

Similar papers

#natural language process... Preprint Sep 2026

The Geometry of Harmfulness in Multi-Turn Attacks

Large language models (LLMs) remain vulnerable to adversarial attacks that circumvent safety alignment to elicit harmful outputs. It remains unclear how harmfulness and refusal representations evolve over the course of multi-turn attacks, and why single-turn defenses are less effective in multi-turn settings. This work...

Yelyzaveta Husieva, Lauren Alvarez · 0 citations
#natural language process... Preprint Oct 2026

Red-TTT: Test-Time Training for Automated Jailbreaking Large Language Models

Large language models remain vulnerable to jailbreaks, and automated red teaming is the standard way to find jailbreaks in large language models at scale. Current methods either draw more samples at test time through search, rewriting, and tree expansion, or train a stronger attacker offline with reinforcement learning...

Tong-Yan Hu, Hao Li, Xiaogeng Liu et al. · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

A Self-Evolving Multi-Agent Framework Defense against LLM Jailbreak Attacks

This work proposes a self-evolving test-time defense built around a persistent, cross-interaction rule memory that substantially reduces attack success rates while preserving benign utility, remains robust under an adaptive composite-wrapper attack, and does not increase over-refusal as the memory grows.

Tongshen Hu, Bryan Hooi · 0 citations
#machine learning Preprint Oct 2026

The Model Plants the Trigger: Answer-Side Backdoor Attacks in Multi-Turn Large Language Models

Safety alignment in Large Language Models (LLMs) remains vulnerable to backdoor attacks. Existing LLM backdoors are almost all input-centric: activation depends on explicit trigger patterns in the user input, so modern guardrails are built to sanitize the input space. We challenge this assumption with a novel answer-si...

Yi-Bo Zhang, Tian-Rong Guan, Liang Lin et al. · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

Narcissus: Program Synthesis Using Context-Aware LLM Approximations

Narcissus is a synthesizer that keeps the proposals as syntax trees and scores each expansion of a candidate program in its context: does a proposal with the same surrounding structure continue the same way, and does the expansion rebuild a fragment the proposals repeat?

Tilman Hinnerichs, Sebastijan Dumančić, Neil Yorke-Smith · 0 citations

Related blog posts

MIT News · Artificial Intelligence Sep 29, 2026

Who we become when we talk to machines

Professor Sherry Turkle’s new book, “Artificial Intimacy,” offers a withering critique of chatbots and the antisocial dynamics she believes they encourage.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.