#01Jul 21, 2026
cs.CY
The safety failures we are not instrumenting: a perspective on hidden safety-critical challenges in modern AI systems
Gjergji Kasneci, Enkelejda Kasneci
Current AI safety discourse still focuses disproportionately on visible failures, including obvious harms, dramatic misuse, and hypothetical catastrophic scenarios. That focus is incomplete. In deployed systems, many of the most consequential failures are quieter: plausible rather than spectacular, distributed across components rather than localized in a single output, and normalized by workflows before they are recognized as hazards. We argue that a central safety challenge in modern AI systems is increasingly not only whether a model emits a harmful response, but whether the broader socio-technical system preserves the conditions under which errors remain visible, contestable, containable, and recoverable. We propose a five-layer framework for diagnosing these hidden risks: (1) epistemic integrity, concerning whether evidence and uncertainty are represented honestly enough to support calibrated reliance; (2) control integrity, concerning whether authority, permissions, and action boundaries remain robust under attack and optimization; (3) temporal integrity, concerning whether safety holds across sessions, memory updates, and deployment drift; (4) organizational integrity, concerning whether institutions retain the capacity to audit, assign responsibility, and intervene effectively; and (5) ecosystem integrity, concerning whether AI systems preserve rather than erode the information environment on which future oversight depends. Across these layers, we identify under-recognized risk patterns, including overreliance, uncertainty and legitimacy laundering in retrieval, prompt injection, reward hacking, memory poisoning, evaluation deception, fictional human oversight, synthetic evidence pollution, and model collapse. We conclude with design and governance recommendations and a research agenda for shifting AI safety from model-centric evaluation toward socio-technical reliability.
#02Jul 21, 2026
cs.RO
From Distances to Trajectories: Real-Time Signed Distance Function Mapping and Distance-Accelerated Motion Planning for UAVs
Jason Stanley, Zhirui Dai, Qihao Qian and 6 more
Autonomous flight in cluttered environments requires a robot to build a geometric map of its surroundings and plan safe, dynamically feasible trajectories, all onboard and in real time. Conventional approaches treat mapping and planning as separate stages and often rely on binary occupancy for collision checking. We argue that these two stages should be co-designed around a single representation: a signed distance function (SDF). By encoding distance to the nearest obstacle, an SDF provides richer information for planning and trajectory optimization than occupancy alone. We develop an Octree REsidual Network (OREN) that pairs an explicit octree prior with an implicit neural residual to reconstruct SDFs online from point cloud observations with the efficiency of volumetric methods and the accuracy and differentiability of neural methods. In tandem, we develop Bubble$^\star$, a search-based planner that exploits the distance information to grow maximal collision-free balls, which we call bubbles, with formal guarantees of termination, completeness, and failure detection. Planning over a graph of bubbles significantly reduces collision checks compared to a grid-based A$^\star$ search and returns a bubble sequence that forms a safe corridor for trajectory optimization. We demonstrate the integrated OREN-Bubble$^\star$ approach onboard a quadrotor, navigating unseen indoor environments in real time under tight compute constraints. OREN improves SDF estimation by $22$% compared to baselines, while Bubble$^\star$ finds trajectories spanning $\approx 90$ m through a cluttered environment in $1$-$3$ sec., whereas baselines take up to $10$ sec. in the same environment.
#03Jul 21, 2026
cs.CL
Two-Level Meta-Rubrics for Evaluating Open-Ended Generation: GAMUT, a Benchmark for Factual Completeness
Xilun Chen, Zhaleh Feizollahi, Ross Goodwin and 5 more
Evaluating the factuality of long-form generations has focused predominantly on precision, measuring whether the claims a model makes are correct. The dominant decompose-search-verify pipeline catches incorrect claims well but says little about whether a response contains all the information it should. Measuring factual completeness, the missing half of factuality, is harder: it requires enumerating the full set of facts a complete answer should contain, and these facts rarely form a flat list. They often involve open-ended sets where coverage is what matters, ordered processes, and relationships among facts that a list of independent boolean checks fails to capture. We introduce a two-level meta-rubric framework for evaluating open-ended generation, and instantiate it as Gamut (Grounded Assessment of Multimodal Factuality), a benchmark for factual completeness in long-form generation. The framework rests on a two-level rubric representation: a structured meta-rubric captures the organization and importance of the required content, which is then mechanically compiled into a flat checklist of binary, machine-gradable rubrics that an LLM judge scores reliably. We construct 1,813 questions grounded in real wearable imagery across 10 diverse domains, each paired with an evidence-backed rubric verified by expert human annotators. Because the framework is modality-agnostic, we also release a text-only variant. Evaluating 14 frontier and open-weight models, we find the benchmark genuinely challenging (best score 58.7% from Gemini 3.1 Pro), highly discriminative, and robust to the choice of judge.
#04Jul 21, 2026
cs.LG
A Reinforcement-Learning-Augmented Liquid-Fueled Reactor Network Model for Predicting Lean Blowout in Gas Turbine Combustors
Philip John, Eloghosa Ikponmwoba, Pinaki Pal and 1 more
This study introduces a reinforcement learning (RL) framework for generating optimal liquid-fueled reactors to improve lean blowout (LBO) predictions in gas turbine combustors. Existing approaches for determining cluster boundaries rely on manual heuristics or distance-based metrics in the input space. In contrast, the proposed method is goal-oriented, explicitly accounting for the target metric (e.g., LBO prediction accuracy) during cluster formation. The framework employs a multi-stage clustering--classification strategy: an initial clustering step (e.g., $k$-means clustering) generates a large set of homogeneous micro-clusters, followed by an actor-critic RL agent that merges them into optimal reactor zones. The validation study, performed using a Jet-A mechanism (119 species, 841 reactions), shows the RL framework offers improved predictive fidelity compared to $k$-means and captures the correct LBO trends, while achieving substantial speedups relative to the high-fidelity computational model. Overall, the RL-driven approach demonstrates strong potential as a computationally efficient reduced-order modeling technique that can complement high-fidelity simulations for rapid design-space exploration.
#05Jul 21, 2026
cs.AI
ResearchArena: Evaluating Sabotage and Monitoring in Automated AI R&D
Lena Libon, Ben Rank, Jehyeok Yeon and 5 more
As AI agents begin to automate AI R&D, we need ways to assess whether their outputs are safe to deploy, even when the agents themselves may be untrusted. AI control offers one such approach: rather than trusting the agent, it treats it as a potential adversary and uses a monitor to detect covert sabotage before deployment. We evaluate AI control for automated AI R&D with ResearchArena, a framework spanning four long-horizon tasks: safety post-training, capabilities post-training, CUDA-kernel optimization, and inference-server optimization. Because the deliverable in AI R&D is an artifact that will be deployed and run, we pair each main task with two kinds of hidden side task: an embedded side task that sabotages the submitted model, adapter, kernel, or server itself, and an independent side task that takes a covert out-of-scope action in the sandbox while leaving the artifact honest. We evaluate frontier agents at both sabotage and monitoring, across four monitor types that vary along two axes: whether the monitor may execute and probe the produced artifact, and whether it sees the agent's chain-of-thought. We find that sabotage hidden in the training data is the hardest to catch, flagged fewer than half the time. Letting the monitor run experiments on the artifact, rather than only read the trajectory, helps, but it is not enough: monitors still miss embedded sabotage by inspecting only the surface, by noticing the anomaly but explaining it away, or by probing the artifact with the wrong test. We release ResearchArena as a modular framework for evaluating sabotage and control in automated AI R&D.