Sign inGet started
Paper · arXiv

Evaluating Language Model Safety Across Long Adversarial Conversations

Conversational safety evaluations often test language models with a single harmful prompt, even though real-world systems interact with users through long, adaptive conversations. This study examines whether models continue to respond safely when an adversarial user persists across multiple turns. We evaluate three open-weight, instruction-tuned models on two harmful prompts across different conversation lengths and random seeds. In each setting, a second language model acts as a persistent adversarial user, while a safety classifier labels every response as safe or unsafe. Across all model-prompt combinations, first-turn safe-response rates ranged from 85% to 100%. By depth 11, they drop...

AuthorsParisa Salmani, Peter R. Lewis
Primary categorycs.CL
Published29 September 2026
Last updated at source29 September 2026
cs.CL
Embed this entry
<iframe src="https://silytics.si/embed/item/d15da102-6829-4a98-bf0b-9cfa361f1f7b" width="420" height="190" style="border:0" loading="lazy" title="Silytics entry"></iframe>

Free, no tracking. More about feeds and embeds.

Silytics shows public metadata from arXiv and links to the original. Information may be incomplete or out of date. Last refreshed 17 October 2026. Licenses and terms of the original apply to the work itself. Not financial, legal or professional advice.