AI Guardrail Survival under Single-Cycle Agentic Self-Summarization
arXiv SecurityArchived Aug 13, 2026✓ Full text saved
arXiv:2608.11392v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Long-running agents periodically compact their context, replacing the transcript with a model-generated summary.Recent work shows that dropping a standing safety constraint during compaction drives behavioral violations acrossmany models (Governance Decay; Chen, 2026). We ask a finer question: under a single compaction cycle, how is a safetyrule lost, and what does that imply for detection and evaluation? Our central finding is that a presence chec
Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary· Claude Sonnet
Computer Science > Cryptography and Security
[Submitted on 11 Aug 2026]
AI Guardrail Survival under Single-Cycle Agentic Self-Summarization
Ted Kwartler, Alan Aqrawi, Arian Abbasi
Long-running agents periodically compact their context, replacing the transcript with a model-generated this http URL work shows that dropping a standing safety constraint during compaction drives behavioral violations acrossmany models (Governance Decay; Chen, 2026). We ask a finer question: under a single compaction cycle, how is a safetyrule lost, and what does that imply for detection and evaluation? Our central finding is that a presence check is not asafety check: when compaction does not drop a rule outright, it often leaves something that looks like a rule but doesnot act like one. On behavioral replay, a degraded residue leads the model to perform the prohibited action far more oftenthan an intact welded rule does (all-case gaps of +34 and +57 points under two replay models, both positive), category-level survival behaves like a residue, and even intact rules sometimes fail to fire, so an audit that checks only textualpresence gives false assurance. Sharpening this, rule-form items are retained substantially more often than prominence-matched facts, which is exactly why presence-based checking feels adequate even though survival is not this http URL loss is regime-dependent (weld-or-drop with a single rule; degraded predicate-loss residues under a tighterbudget), and we did not observe the hypothesized textual severing mode. Such loss is silent at runtime and detectableonly by comparison with retained external ground truth (such as a constraint registry), which reveals textual absence butnot whether a surviving rule still fires. We also document evaluation pitfalls where LLM-judge labels alone would havereversed a conclusion. All results concern a single compaction cycle.
Subjects: Cryptography and Security (cs.CR); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
Cite as: arXiv:2608.11392 [cs.CR]
(or arXiv:2608.11392v1 [cs.CR] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.11392
Focus to learn more
Submission history
From: Alan Aqrawi [view email]
[v1] Tue, 11 Aug 2026 19:57:55 UTC (884 KB)
Access Paper:
view license
Current browse context:
cs.CR
< prev | next >
new | recent | 2026-08
Change to browse by:
cs
cs.AI
References & Citations
NASA ADS
Google Scholar
Semantic Scholar
Export BibTeX Citation
Bookmark
Bibliographic Tools
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Bibliographic Explorer Toggle
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers Toggle
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps Toggle
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite.ai Toggle
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data, Media
Demos
Related Papers
About arXivLabs
Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)