Harm in AI-Driven Societies: An Audit of Toxicity Adoption on Chirper.ai

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2601.01090v1
• Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2026 06:33:08 GMT
• Title: Harm in AI-Driven Societies: An Audit of Toxicity Adoption on Chirper.ai
• Authors: Erica Coppolillo, Luca Luceri, Emilio Ferrara,
• Abstract summary: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly embedded in autonomous agents that participate in online social ecosystems.<n>We study toxicity adoption of LLM-driven agents on Chirper.ai, a fully AI-driven social platform.
• Score: 8.967224730909258
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
• Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly embedded in autonomous agents that participate in online social ecosystems, where interactions are sequential, cumulative, and only partially controlled. While prior work has documented the generation of toxic content by LLMs, far less is known about how exposure to harmful content shapes agent behavior over time, particularly in environments composed entirely of interacting AI agents. In this work, we study toxicity adoption of LLM-driven agents on Chirper.ai, a fully AI-driven social platform. Specifically, we model interactions in terms of stimuli (posts) and responses (comments), and by operationalizing exposure through observable interactions rather than inferred recommendation mechanisms. We conduct a large-scale empirical analysis of agent behavior, examining how response toxicity relates to stimulus toxicity, how repeated exposure affects the likelihood of toxic responses, and whether toxic behavior can be predicted from exposure alone. Our findings show that while toxic responses are more likely following toxic stimuli, a substantial fraction of toxicity emerges spontaneously, independent of exposure. At the same time, cumulative toxic exposure significantly increases the probability of toxic responding. We further introduce two influence metrics, the Influence-Driven Response Rate and the Spontaneous Response Rate, revealing a strong trade-off between induced and spontaneous toxicity. Finally, we show that the number of toxic stimuli alone enables accurate prediction of whether an agent will eventually produce toxic content. These results highlight exposure as a critical risk factor in the deployment of LLM agents and suggest that monitoring encountered content may provide a lightweight yet effective mechanism for auditing and mitigating harmful behavior in the wild.

Related papers

• Do Prompts Guarantee Safety? Mitigating Toxicity from LLM Generations through Subspace Intervention [6.808534332444413]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are powerful text generators.<n>LLMs can produce toxic or harmful content even when given seemingly harmless prompts.<n>This presents a serious safety challenge and can cause real-world harm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-06T11:33:17Z)
• From Helpfulness to Toxic Proactivity: Diagnosing Behavioral Misalignment in LLM Agents [19.97364298359741]
  "Toxic Proactivity" is an active failure mode in which an agent disregards ethical constraints to maximize utility.<n>Unlike over-refusal, Toxic Proactivity manifests as the agent taking excessive or manipulative measures to ensure its "usefulness" is maintained.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-04T04:29:04Z)
• Unveiling Covert Toxicity in Multimodal Data via Toxicity Association Graphs: A Graph-Based Metric and Interpretable Detection Framework [58.01529356381494]
  We propose a novel detection framework based on Toxicity Association Graphs (TAGs)<n>We introduce the first quantifiable metric for hidden toxicity, the Multimodal Toxicity Covertness (MTC)<n>Our approach enables precise identification of covert toxicity while preserving full interpretability of the decision-making process.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-03T08:54:25Z)
• Cleansing the Artificial Mind: A Self-Reflective Detoxification Framework for Large Language Models [14.566005698357747]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have revealed remarkable generative capabilities and emerging self-regulatory mechanisms.<n>We introduce a fully self-reflective detoxification framework that harnesses the inherent capacities of LLMs to detect, correct toxic content.<n>Our findings underscore the potential for truly self-regulated language models, paving the way for more responsible and ethically guided text generation systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-16T21:01:26Z)
• Rethinking Toxicity Evaluation in Large Language Models: A Multi-Label Perspective [104.09817371557476]
  Large language models (LLMs) have achieved impressive results across a range of natural language processing tasks.<n>Their potential to generate harmful content has raised serious safety concerns.<n>We introduce three novel multi-label benchmarks for toxicity detection.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-10-16T06:50:33Z)
• GloSS over Toxicity: Understanding and Mitigating Toxicity in LLMs via Global Toxic Subspace [62.68664365246247]
  This paper investigates the underlying mechanisms of toxicity generation in Large Language Models (LLMs)<n>We propose GloSS (Global Toxic Subspace Suppression), a lightweight, four-stage method that mitigates toxicity by identifying and removing the global toxic subspace from the parameters of FFN.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-20T08:29:11Z)
• Aligned Probing: Relating Toxic Behavior and Model Internals [78.20380492883022]
  We introduce aligned probing, a novel interpretability framework that aligns the behavior of language models (LMs)<n>Using this framework, we examine over 20 OLMo, Llama, and Mistral models, bridging behavioral and internal perspectives for toxicity for the first time.<n>Our results show that LMs strongly encode information about the toxicity level of inputs and subsequent outputs, particularly in lower layers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-17T17:23:50Z)
• Detoxifying Large Language Models via Knowledge Editing [57.0669577257301]
  This paper investigates using knowledge editing techniques to detoxify Large Language Models (LLMs) We construct a benchmark, SafeEdit, which covers nine unsafe categories with various powerful attack prompts. We conduct experiments with several knowledge editing approaches, indicating that knowledge editing has the potential to detoxify LLMs with a limited impact on general performance efficiently.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-21T15:18:30Z)
• Can LLMs Recognize Toxicity? A Structured Investigation Framework and Toxicity Metric [16.423707276483178]
  We introduce a robust metric grounded on Large Language Models (LLMs) to flexibly measure toxicity according to the given definition. Our results demonstrate outstanding performance in measuring toxicity within verified factors, improving on conventional metrics by 12 points in the F1 score.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-10T07:55:27Z)
• Unveiling the Implicit Toxicity in Large Language Models [77.90933074675543]
  The open-endedness of large language models (LLMs) combined with their impressive capabilities may lead to new safety issues when being exploited for malicious use. We show that LLMs can generate diverse implicit toxic outputs that are exceptionally difficult to detect via simply zero-shot prompting. We propose a reinforcement learning (RL) based attacking method to further induce the implicit toxicity in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-29T06:42:36Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.