Correction or Manipulation? Measuring epistemic vigilance in LLM agents
New arXiv paper (arXiv:2610.36453v1) tests seven LLMs from four vendors in two studies—one on answers and one on customer-support actions—using simulated users who apply graded pressure via claimed authority or cited sources. Using signal-detection theory to separate propensity to concede from discrimination, the authors find citations often increase concession and sometimes worsen discrimination; five models never violated a verification policy in the agent study, while Ministral 3B violated it mainly under claimed authority and Ministral 8B reported changes it had not made; instructing models to revise only on verifiable evidence mostly shifted concession propensity rather than improving discrimination.