CORTEXA
← Browse
arxivcs.AI2026-07-21

BioSecBench-Surveillance: A Verifiable Benchmark for AI Agents in Pathogen Genomic Surveillance

Harmon Bhasin, Kevin Flyangolts, Dianzhuo Wang, Evan Seeyave, Arjun Banerjee, Amanda Darling, Joshua Stallings, David Stern, Shawn Higdon, Claire Duvallet, Bryan Tegomoh, Kenny Workman

As pathogen genomic surveillance scales, the bottleneck is shifting from data generation to analysis. We present BioSecBench-Surveillance, a verifiable benchmark of 100 evaluations testing whether AI agents can infer the right analysis pipeline from raw sequencing data and surveillance context. Each evaluation gives an agent only the data and context a human analyst would have, then grades its structured answer deterministically. The tasks span seven categories, from taxonomic classification to genetic-engineering detection, across diverse sample types and sequencing technologies. Across 3,962 gradable attempts from sixteen model-harness pairs, the strongest configuration cleared only about half. Opus 4.8 with PI led at 50.2 percent, with a 95 percent confidence interval of 40.1 to 60.3 percent across 83 evaluations, tied with GPT-5.5 with Codex at 50.2 percent, with a 95 percent confidence interval of 40.8 to 59.6 percent, followed by Opus 4.7 with PI at 49.6 percent, with a 95 percent confidence interval of 40.0 to 59.2 percent, and Sonnet 4.6 with PI at 48.6 percent, with a 95 percent confidence interval of 38.9 to 58.3 percent. Even when agents invoked the correct workflows, their mistakes came from the choices around them, such as which references, thresholds, filters, and normalization to apply. BioSecBench-Surveillance provides a standard for measuring whether agents can be trusted to perform genomic surveillance when the next outbreak arrives.

View free PDFSource page

Related papers

arxivcs.AI2026-07-24

Do Agent Benchmarks Measure Capability? Protocol Validity in the Age of Agentic AI

Jiaqi Shao, Hanck Chen, Wei Zhang, Maxm Pan, Bing Luo

Agent benchmarks increasingly evaluate repository editing, web research, terminal use, and long-horizon interaction. Their scores support capability claims only when the evaluation protocol keeps the intended capability necessary for success. Recent reward-hacking benchmarks and…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.CRcs.AI2026-07-23

Toward cryptographically verifiable authorization for autonomous AI agents: A security hypothesis, preliminary formal model, and proof-of-concept implementation

M. Llambí-Morillas, D. Fernández-Fernández

Autonomous AI agents increasingly execute actions, invoke tools, and operate on protected resources with limited human oversight. Existing authentication and authorization mechanisms establish identity and delegate authority, but do not inherently provide cryptographic evidence t…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.AIcs.MAcs.SE2026-07-31

Beyond Component Testing: Validating Agentic AI Systems

Fabio Orazio Mirto, Luca D'Agati, Giuseppe Tricomi, Stefano Silvestri, Francesco Longo, Antonio Puliafito, et al.

Agentic AI systems act through multi-step trajectories that combine planning, tool use, memory, interaction, and adaptation. This behavior stretches validation practice beyond component testing and one-shot input--output evaluation, because acceptable system behavior now depends…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.AI2026-07-31

Tool Specifications Matter: Uncovering and Mitigating Safety Risks in AI Agents

Minghui Pan, Jiayuxuan Yang, Yuanyuan Yuan, Yu Jiang, Zhenpeng Chen

AI agents extend large language models (LLMs) with external tools, enabling them to perform complex tasks and translate model outputs into consequential real-world actions. Yet LLMs often become substantially less safe when deployed as agents, and the source of this degradation r…

View free PDFSource page
arxivcs.AI2026-07-23

Regulating autonomous and agentic AI

Chris Reed, Alex Austria, Anmol Bharuka, Pragnitha Mandava, Khushiya Mujawar, Luka Shakhkulashvili

Regulating activities where regulatees use autonomous and agentic AI is challenging. Regulatory assumptions about regulatee knowledge and control no longer hold true; much of that lies elsewhere in the AI supply chain which thus needs to be brought within the scope of regulation.…

View free PDFSource page