Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

MedSentry: Understanding and Mitigating Safety Risks in Medical LLM Multi-Agent Systems

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2505.20824 v1 pith:NLL4CBYT submitted 2025-05-27 cs.MA cs.AI

MedSentry: Understanding and Mitigating Safety Risks in Medical LLM Multi-Agent Systems

classification cs.MA cs.AI
keywords multi-agentmedicalmedsentrysafetyagentsarchitecturesdecentralizedevaluation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in healthcare, ensuring their safety, particularly within collaborative multi-agent configurations, is paramount. In this paper we introduce MedSentry, a benchmark comprising 5 000 adversarial medical prompts spanning 25 threat categories with 100 subthemes. Coupled with this dataset, we develop an end-to-end attack-defense evaluation pipeline to systematically analyze how four representative multi-agent topologies (Layers, SharedPool, Centralized, and Decentralized) withstand attacks from 'dark-personality' agents. Our findings reveal critical differences in how these architectures handle information contamination and maintain robust decision-making, exposing their underlying vulnerability mechanisms. For instance, SharedPool's open information sharing makes it highly susceptible, whereas Decentralized architectures exhibit greater resilience thanks to inherent redundancy and isolation. To mitigate these risks, we propose a personality-scale detection and correction mechanism that identifies and rehabilitates malicious agents, restoring system safety to near-baseline levels. MedSentry thus furnishes both a rigorous evaluation framework and practical defense strategies that guide the design of safer LLM-based multi-agent systems in medical domains.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Before Agents Speak: Pre-hoc Failure Risk Inference in Multi-Agent Systems

    cs.CR 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0

    HalluProp infers per-agent and system-level hallucination risk in multi-agent LLMs before interaction via role–query misalignment, topology-aware propagation, and differentiable Noisy-OR aggregation.

  2. DrugBench: Evaluating AI Control Protocols for Medication Harm Mitigation

    cs.AI 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    DrugBench evaluates AI control protocols on 3,671 medical conversations for four medication harm types and finds existing protocols subvertible, proposing severity-based monitoring instead.

  3. The Path to Self-Evolving Clinical Systems: Scaling Medical Agents from Assistance to Autonomy

    cs.AI 2026-07 conditional novelty 4.5

    Medical agents should be scaled mainly by richer clinical environments and self-evolution loops, not parameter growth alone, under a three-level autonomy taxonomy.