arXiv (All)
open access
When AI Investigators Cannot Trust Their Tools: Conflict-Aware Evidence Verification for Cyber Threat Investigation
LLM agents increasingly triage security alerts by combining the outputs of several detection tools, implicitly treating those tools as trustworthy. Unlike prior work on conflicts between a model's knowledge and its context, we study conflicts among the tools themselves: what happens when this machin
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- When AI Investigators Cannot Trust Their Tools: Conflict-Aware Evidence Verification for Cyber Threat Investigation#1514851
- Cognitive Trust Architecture for Mitigating Agentic AI Threats: Adaptive Reasoning and Resilient Cyber Defense#716294
- Polar: LLM-Powered Synthesis of Real-World Cyber Evidence for Prioritization and Mitigation#1216673
- BlueSTAR: Tiered Agentic Architecture for Autonomous Cyber Defense#999533
- Connecting the Dots in Agentic AI Security: A Cross-Dimensional Threat Taxonomy, Evaluation Maturity, and Open Challenges#1050085
Record · ID 1534378
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive