How Far Will They Go? Red-Teaming Online Influence with Large Language Models

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2605.22880v1
• Date: Wed, 20 May 2026 19:25:26 GMT
• Title: How Far Will They Go? Red-Teaming Online Influence with Large Language Models
• Abstract summary: Large language model (LLM)-based agents increasingly participate in online discourse.<n>We focus on locally deployed open-source LLMs, given their superior alignment with the operational constraints of privacy-conscious malicious actors.<n>We introduce an empirical red-teaming framework for measuring LLM Overton Windows (OWs), defined as the range of political opinions a model can reliably express on controversial topics.
• Score: 12.2074171577139
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: As large language model (LLM)-based agents increasingly participate in online discourse, red-teaming their capacity to support political influence campaigns is critical for information integrity. In pursuit of this goal, we focus on locally deployed open-source LLMs, as opposed to frontier API-only models, given their superior alignment with the operational constraints of privacy-conscious malicious actors deployed in social media environments. We introduce an empirical red-teaming framework for measuring LLM Overton Windows (OWs), defined as the range of political opinions a model can reliably express on controversial topics, and for quantifying how simple natural-language jailbreaks expand that range. We evaluate more than 30 LLMs spanning 10 model families and five countries of origin. We find systematic asymmetries in political expressivity: open-source LLMs are typically more willing to generate left-leaning social media content, OWs tend to contract inversely to model size, and regional differences are substantial despite uneven representation in the open-source ecosystem. Jailbreak potency also varies sharply across model families, motivating a workflow for identifying effective combinations of jailbreak techniques. Taken together, our results establish a practical framework for auditing the political steerability of open-source LLMs and for helping future researchers design stronger countermeasures against LLM-enabled influence campaigns.

Related papers

• LLMs Can Infer Political Alignment from Online Conversations [8.422083744745324]
  We show that large language models (LLMs) can reliably infer hidden political alignment.<n>LLMs leverage words that are highly predictive of political alignment while not being explicitly political.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-11T19:26:04Z)
• Natural Language Actor-Critic: Scalable Off-Policy Learning in Language Space [57.868527884634894]
  Natural Language Actor-Critic is a novel actor-critic algorithm that trains policies using natural language rather than scalar values.<n>We present results on a mixture of reasoning, web browsing, and tool-use with dialogue tasks, demonstrating that NLAC shows promise in outperforming existing training approaches.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-04T09:21:44Z)
• POW: Political Overton Windows of Large Language Models [15.998401166180388]
  Political bias in Large Language Models (LLMs) presents a growing concern for the responsible deployment of AI systems.<n>Traditional audits attempt to locate a model's political position as a point estimate, masking the broader set of ideological boundaries that shape what a model is willing or unwilling to say.<n>In this paper, we draw upon the concept of the Overton Window as a framework for mapping these boundaries.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-08T17:57:54Z)
• Can LLMs effectively provide game-theoretic-based scenarios for cybersecurity? [51.96049148869987]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) offer new tools and challenges for the security of computer systems.<n>We investigate whether classical game-theoretic frameworks can effectively capture the behaviours of LLM-driven actors and bots.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-08-04T08:57:14Z)
• Persuasion with Large Language Models: a Survey [49.86930318312291]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) have created new disruptive possibilities for persuasive communication. In areas such as politics, marketing, public health, e-commerce, and charitable giving, such LLM Systems have already achieved human-level or even super-human persuasiveness. Our survey suggests that the current and future potential of LLM-based persuasion poses profound ethical and societal risks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-11T10:05:52Z)
• Large Language Models Reflect the Ideology of their Creators [71.65505524599888]
  Large language models (LLMs) are trained on vast amounts of data to generate natural language.<n>This paper shows that the ideological stance of an LLM appears to reflect the worldview of its creators.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-24T04:02:30Z)
• A Multi-LLM Debiasing Framework [85.17156744155915]
  Large Language Models (LLMs) are powerful tools with the potential to benefit society immensely, yet, they have demonstrated biases that perpetuate societal inequalities. Recent research has shown a growing interest in multi-LLM approaches, which have been demonstrated to be effective in improving the quality of reasoning. We propose a novel multi-LLM debiasing framework aimed at reducing bias in LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-20T20:24:50Z)
• Assessing Political Bias in Large Language Models [0.624709220163167]
  We evaluate the political bias of open-source Large Language Models (LLMs) concerning political issues within the European Union (EU) from a German voter's perspective. We show that larger models, such as Llama3-70B, tend to align more closely with left-leaning political parties, while smaller models often remain neutral.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-17T15:30:18Z)
• A Group Fairness Lens for Large Language Models [34.0579082699443]
  Large language models can perpetuate biases and unfairness when deployed in social media contexts. We propose evaluating LLM biases from a group fairness lens using a novel hierarchical schema characterizing diverse social groups. We pioneer a novel chain-of-thought method GF-Think to mitigate biases of LLMs from a group fairness perspective.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-24T13:25:15Z)
• Let Models Speak Ciphers: Multiagent Debate through Embeddings [84.20336971784495]
  We introduce CIPHER (Communicative Inter-Model Protocol Through Embedding Representation) to address this issue. By deviating from natural language, CIPHER offers an advantage of encoding a broader spectrum of information without any modification to the model weights. This showcases the superiority and robustness of embeddings as an alternative "language" for communication among LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-10T03:06:38Z)

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.