Xixun Lin
Publications
CIA: Inferring the Communication Topology from LLM-based Multi-Agent Systems
LLM-based Multi-Agent Systems (MAS) have demonstrated remarkable capabilities in solving complex tasks. Central to MAS is the communication topology which governs how agents exchange information internally. Consequently, the security of communication topologies has attracted increasing attention. In this paper, we investigate a critical privacy risk: MAS communication topologies can be inferred under a restrictive black-box setting, exposing system vulnerabilities and posing significant intellectual property threats. To explore this risk, we propose Communication Inference Attack (CIA), a novel attack that constructs new adversarial queries to induce intermediate agents' reasoning outputs and models their semantic correlations through the proposed global bias disentanglement and LLM-guided weak supervision. Extensive experiments on MAS with optimized communication topologies demonstrate the effectiveness of CIA, achieving an average AUC of 0.87 and a peak AUC of up to 0.99, thereby revealing the substantial privacy risk in MAS.
Do LLMs Know Tool Irrelevance? Demystifying Structural Alignment Bias in Tool Invocations
Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities in utilizing external tools. In practice, however, LLMs are often exposed to tools that are irrelevant to the user's query, in which case the desired behavior is to refrain from invocations. In this work, we identify a widespread yet overlooked mechanistic flaw in tool refusal, which we term structural alignment bias: Even when a tool fails to serve the user's goal, LLMs still tend to invoke it whenever query attributes can be validly assigned to tool parameters. To systematically study this bias, we introduce SABEval, a new dataset that decouples structural alignment from semantic relevance. Our analysis shows that structural alignment bias induces severe tool-invocation errors in LLMs, yet remains largely unaccounted for in existing evaluations. To investigate the internal mechanisms underlying this bias, we propose Contrastive Attention Attribution, which reveals two competing pathways for semantic checking and structural matching. The relative strength of these pathways drives LLMs' tool invocation decisions. Based on these findings, we further introduce a rebalancing strategy that effectively mitigates structural alignment bias, as demonstrated by extensive experiments, without degrading general tool-use capabilities.
Hard Constraints Meet Soft Generation: Guaranteed Feasibility for LLM-based Combinatorial Optimization
Large language models (LLMs) have emerged as promising general-purpose solvers for combinatorial optimization (CO), yet they fundamentally lack mechanisms to guarantee solution feasibility which is critical for real-world deployment. In this work, we introduce FALCON, a framework that ensures 100\% feasibility through three key innovations: (i) \emph{grammar-constrained decoding} enforces syntactic validity, (ii) a \emph{feasibility repair layer} corrects semantic constraint violations, and (iii) \emph{adaptive Best-of-$N$ sampling} allocates inference compute efficiently. To train the underlying LLM, we introduce the Best-anchored Objective-guided Preference Optimization (BOPO) in LLM training, which weights preference pairs by their objective gap, providing dense supervision without human labels. Theoretically, we prove convergence for BOPO and provide bounds on repair-induced quality loss. Empirically, across seven NP-hard CO problems, FALCON achieves perfect feasibility while matching or exceeding the solution quality of state-of-the-art neural and LLM-based solvers.