Safety defenses for large language models (LLMs) are typically trained and evaluated on single-turn prompts, yet real attacks often unfold as indirect, multi-turn probing. To defend against this more nuanced form of deception, we present a unified pipeline that generates realistic multi-turn deceptive question sets via multi-objective genetic prompt optimization with co-evolving mutation operators. We validate this dataset through a human study, which also revealed that early generations yielded the most convincing deception and practical constraints such as adherence filtering and ordering effects. Using this data, we were able to detect deceptive attempts to access prohibited information using simple, explainable geometric signals in embedding space coupled with a lightweight feed-forward classifier. Three geometric features (angular coverage, distance ratio, and linearity) augmented with pairwise similarity statistics led to a compact predictive model that achieved consistently high recall (0.89) across base, reworded, and truncated (three-turn) scenarios, with test-time F1 ranging from 0.74-0.86. The results support a central hypothesis that multi-turn deceptive intent leaves a stable geometric footprint that enables lightweight, transparent screening without expensive end-to-end training. We further discuss responsible uses, limitations, and paths toward larger, more diverse human-evaluated datasets. The primary contribution to artificial intelligence is the multi-objective evolutionary framework for prompt generation, and the engineering application is the deployment of a lightweight geometric detection system for LLM safety infrastructure.

As LLM-generated code grows in popularity, more evaluation is needed to assess the risks of using such tools, especially for safety-critical applications such as path planning. Existing coding benchmarks are insufficient as they do not reflect the context and complexity of safety-critical applications. To this end, we assessed six LLMs' abilities to generate the code for three different path-planning algorithms and tested them on three maps of various difficulties. Our results suggest that LLM-generated code presents serious hazards for path planning applications and should not be applied in safety-critical contexts without rigorous testing.

In addition, researchers have explored how LLMs can be In early 2024, Volkswagen premiered the first vehicle with used in vision-and-language navigation (VLN). In robotics, ChatGPT integrated into its voice assistant (Volkswagen VLN involves giving robots or agents verbal instructions on 2024). Volkswagen claimed that its ChatGPT-enabled voice how to navigate using visual cues and landmarks (Schumann assistant could be used to control the infotainment, navigation, et al. 2024). Challenges of VLN include visual and natural and air conditioning, or to answer general knowledge language understanding, as well as spatial and temporal questions (Volkswagen 2024).

Model selection is a necessary step in unsupervised machine learning. Despite numerous criteria and metrics, model selection remains subjective. A high degree of subjectivity may lead to questions about repeatability and reproducibility of various machine learning studies and doubts about the robustness of models deployed in the real world. Yet, the impact of modelers' preferences on model selection outcomes remains largely unexplored. This study uses the Hidden Markov Model as an example to investigate the subjectivity involved in model selection. We asked 33 participants and three Large Language Models (LLMs) to make model selections in three scenarios. Results revealed variability and inconsistencies in both the participants' and the LLMs' choices, especially when different criteria and metrics disagree. Sources of subjectivity include varying opinions on the importance of different criteria and metrics, differing views on how parsimonious a model should be, and how the size of a dataset should influence model selection. The results underscore the importance of developing a more standardized way to document subjective choices made in model selection processes.