Artificial Intelligence · 2026-11-09

Debate to Deceive: Poisoning LLM's Fact-Checking via Game-Theoretic Multi-Agent Debate

arXiv:2611.08756v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Knowledge attacks on Large Language Models, such as manipulating fact-checking judgments, pose significant risks to AI reliability. Existing approaches -- adversarial suffix/template injection and single-agent self-reflection -- lack robustness across diverse defenses and are prone to confirmation bias and costly trial-and-error, respectively.

SHARE THIS ARTICLE LinkedIn X Facebook

arXiv:2611.08756v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Knowledge attacks on Large Language Models, such as manipulating fact-checking judgments, pose significant risks to AI reliability. Existing approaches -- adversarial suffix/template injection and single-agent self-reflection -- lack robustness across diverse defenses and are prone to confirmation bias and costly trial-and-error, respectively. We propose Debate-to-Deceive (D2D), a multi-agent debate framework grounded in human debate structure and rhetorical style, enabling agents to generate adversarial passages that are semantically coherent, rhetorically effective, and resistant to early confirmation bias.

Source and attribution

Original source: arXiv AI ↗

This is an attributed editorial digest. For the complete study and original reporting, follow the source link.

Reader feedback

0 likes · 0 dislikes

Sign in to like or dislike this research.

SHARE THIS ARTICLE LinkedIn X Facebook
← Back to research archive