ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2026
Adversarial robustness of LLM-based multi-agent systems for engineering problems.
Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in multi-agent systems (MAS), including for solving engineering problems. Unlike purely linguistic tasks, engineering workflows demand formal rigor and numerical accuracy, meaning that adversarial perturbations can cause not just degraded performance but systematically incorrect or unsafe results. In this work, we present one of the first systematic studies of adversarial robustness of LLM-based MAS in engineering contexts. Using representative problems-including pipe pressure loss (Darcy-Weisbach), beam deflection, mathematical modeling, and graph traversal-we investigate how misleading agents affect collaborative reasoning and quantify error propagation under controlled adversarial influence. Our results show that adversarial vulnerabilities in engineering differ from those observed in generic MAS evaluations in important aspects: system robustness is sensitive to task type, the subtlety of injected errors, and communication order among agents. In particular, engineering tasks with higher structural complexity or easily confusable numerical variations are especially prone to adversarial influence. We further identify design choices, such as prompt framing, agent role assignment, and discussion order, that significantly improve resilience. These findings highlight the need for domain-specific evaluation of adversarial robustness and provide actionable insights for designing MAS that are trustworthy and safe in engineering applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.