×

Academic Intelligence · Curated Daily

Explore the Frontier of Global Academia

AcademicHub aggregates real-time literature from top journals and preprint platforms. Build your personal research radar and let large language models compile cross-disciplinary analysis briefings automatically.

Authors: Aleksandra Korolova ×
Shuffle
01.
arXiv (CS.LG) 2026-06-16

Greedy Coordinate Diffusion: Effective and Semantically Coherent Adversarial Attacks via Diffusion Guidance

arXiv:2606.15531v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Fine-tuning aligned language models on benign tasks (e.g. math tutoring) systematically breaks safety guardrails, even when training data contains no harmful content. While mechanistic approaches have shed light on where alignment resides in model weights, they do not by provide a general formal framework for deriving guarantees about when fine-tuning degrades it – leaving the field without principled tools for predicting or preventing alignment collapse. We develop a local geometric framework through geometric analysis of parameter-space trajectories and apply it to understand the fragility of alignment in fine-tuning. While first-order analysis suggests orthogonal updates are safe, we prove this is illusory: the curvature of the fine-tuning loss induces second-order acceleration that can induce second-order drift into alignment-sensitive regions. We formalize a construct of our framework as the Alignment Instability Condition (AIC), three geometric properties that, when present, are sufficient to guarantee degradation. Our main result proves quartic onset of alignment degradation along gradient-flow trajectories, determined by how sharply alignment depends on specific parameters and how strongly tasks couple to these parameters. These findings yield formal sufficient conditions under which static first-order protection can fail under gradient descent. We further empirically validate the framework's foundations, showing that the Fisher Information Matrix provides a proxy for the degree of safety degradation across diverse fine-tuning.

02.
arXiv (CS.CL) 2026-06-11

Can AI Agents Synthesize Scientific Conclusions?

Scientific AI agents increasingly retrieve evidence, reason across sources, and synthesize conclusions used in consequential decisions. Yet, their ability to do so in high-stakes domains such as health remains unclear. We introduce SciConBench, a large-scale live benchmark of 9.11K questions and expert-written conclusions from systematic reviews to evaluate open-domain scientific conclusion synthesis. The benchmark draws on an expert-validated automated evaluation pipeline that decomposes conclusions into atomic facts and measures correctness and comprehensiveness via factual precision and recall. To mitigate data leakage, we further introduce SciConHarness, a clean-room evaluation harness that equips agents with controlled web interaction to ensure valid measurement. Evaluating 8 frontier models and deep research agents, we find that factual quality remains low: under clean-room settings, the best agent achieves only a factual F1 of 0.337. Our clean-room setting consistently reduces performance relative to unconstrained evaluation, suggesting that leakage inflates estimates of models' true synthesis capabilities. Finally, we audit consumer-facing agents (e.g., Google AI Overview, OpenEvidence) and find they frequently generate incomplete and sometimes contradictory conclusions, even when the ground-truth answer is available. Overall, our results show that reliable synthesis of scientific conclusions remains an open challenge, and that clean-room evaluation is essential for assessing open-domain AI agents.