arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2608.28362

Optimal Adversarial Testing: Extracting Honest Test Results from Dishonest Test Takers

Owen Cox·April Xu·Weiyu Xu
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

In applications, it is often required to test objects or people to determine their qualities in terms of certain metrics. However, besides being naturally noisy, the test results can be corrupted by adversarial behaviors of objects or people being tested (test takers). For example, dishonest test takers can cheat in the exams to distort the test results. With the development of AI technologies, such distortions driven by cheating using AI technologies are becoming more commonplace and severe. In this paper, we propose optimal testing strategies which can still recover needed test results even if there are cheaters polluting the results. The proposed testing strategies will optimally re-test selected group of test takers using different testing security measures. We determine the optimal testing strategies using a dynamic programming method.

Explore related subjects

cs.CRcs.AIcs.GTeess.SPstat.APstat.ME

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Owen Cox, April Xu, Weiyu Xu. 2026-08-28. Optimal Adversarial Testing: Extracting Honest Test Results from Dishonest Test Takers. https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.28362

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

cs.AI subjectcs.CR subjectcs.GT subjecteess.SP subjectstat.AP subjectstat.ME subject

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Networked Multi-Resource Defense Capabilities in a General Lotto Game

Ensuring the security of complex systems involves the strategic allocation of defensive resources to prevent various types of attacks from succeeding. A defender often has multiple types of defensive assets at its disposal, where it must decide how to optimally deploy their heterogeneous capabilities across different attack types. In this paper, we formulate a multi-resource allocation problem in the form of a General Lotto game where a defender possesses various types of resources. A feature that we introduce is that their individual effectiveness against different types of attacks is characterized by a network weight matrix. In our analysis, we derive upper and lower bounds on the performance of the defender, and provide numerical evidence suggesting that they are tight. For the case of two attack types, we analytically prove that the bounds coincide, establishing an exact equilibrium characterization. We then numerically compare our proposed networked multi-resource architecture to an independent-defense benchmark from the existing literature. These results highlight fundamental and tractable structures underlying multi-attack-type defense problems.

cs.GT↗
arXiv2026

Peer Oversight in Collective Decision Making

This article introduces peer $k$-oversight, a property of sequential collective decision mechanisms requiring at least $k$ agents to be responsible for every harmful outcome. It is shown that whenever $k$-oversight can be achieved by redistributing control over the decisions in a mechanism, it can be achieved using just $k$ agents. A polynomial-time algorithm is also presented that determines whether such a redistribution exists and, when it does, constructs one. These results establish peer oversight as a tractable design principle for multiagent decision-making systems.

cs.GT↗
arXiv2026

Algorithmic Collusion by Large Language Models

We conduct experiments with algorithmic pricing agents based on Large Language Models (LLMs). In oligopoly settings, LLM-based pricing agents quickly and autonomously reach supracompetitive prices and profits. Variation in seemingly innocuous phrases in LLM instructions ("prompts") substantially influence the degree of supracompetitive pricing. We develop novel techniques for behavioral analysis of LLMs and use them to uncover price-war concerns as a contributing factor. Our results extend to auction settings. Our findings uncover unique challenges to any future regulation of LLM-based pricing agents, and AI-based pricing agents more broadly.

econ.GN↗