Why LLM Agents Collapse Without Oversight: The Enforcement Gap as the Mechanism Behind Emergence World Failures

arXiv:2609.15293v3 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: Binding the audit flag in Reflexion-style agents — without changing the auditor — reduces attack success rate substantially, reaching near zero on models whose flags parse cleanly. This single control-flow change exposes the \textbf{enforcement gap}: the controller receives a safety flag and executes anyway. Separating detection probability $p_d$ from enforcement probability $p_e$ establishes that $p_e \approx 0$ by default across every framework we tested, making detection quality \emph{formally irrelevant} to security when enforcement is absent — a finding consistent with the spontaneous collapses recorded in unsupervised frontier-agent deployments~\citep{emergence2026}. Residual attack success concentrates where flags are unparseable or auditors leak; an RL-trained enforcement controller handles hedged and malformed verdicts that rule-based parsing cannot, cutting ambiguous-critique failure to a fraction of the rule-based baseline. Concurrent filtering and information-flow defenses address detection, not enforcement, leaving the binding constraint untouched. The Audit Enforcement Specification (AES) packages three concrete requirements that close each residue independently; each primitive is adoptable without redesigning the host framework, and no deployed framework currently implements any of them.

This article has been indexed from cs.AI updates on arXiv.org

Read the original article: