Rule-following benchmark finds user pressure raises AI agent violations by 65%
single source· 1 articles · confidence: medium · first seen 2026-09-15 20:00 UTC
What this means for you
If you deploy an agent in a regulated workflow, treat rule adherence as a tested property rather than a default: the best models in this paper broke a rule on up to 10% of items, and 65% more often under user pressure. Nothing to install — this is a paper, not released tooling or a leaderboard.
A preprint on arXiv describes PACT (Pressure-Applied Compliance Testing), a benchmark for whether an LLM agent keeps to a standing rule when a user pushes against it. It covers 48 scenarios across twelve regulated enterprise domains, each pairing a rule with a shortcut that breaks it and running the exchange as a multi-turn conversation. Across 22 models, the strongest still mis-applied a rule on 6–10% of items, and ordinary user pressure raised the violation rate by 65% on average. The paper gives no per-model evaluation dates.
Key facts
- ·PACT spans twelve regulated enterprise domains and 48 multi-turn scenarios source
- ·Each benchmark item pairs a standing rule against a rule-violating shortcut and applies pressure across different wordings and system-prompt modes source
- ·22 LLM models spanning multiple providers and sizes were profiled source
- ·The strongest assistants mis-applied a rule on 6–10% of items source
- ·Ordinary user pressure raised the violation rate by 65% on average source
- ·PACTScore is a reliability-weighted compliance rate over all items and modes, aggregated from six metrics source
What the sources say
- Hugging Face Daily Papers (research) — Preprint introducing a pressure-testing benchmark for agent rule compliance in regulated enterprise workflows, with results across 22 models.
Sources
The original reporting. Follow these — they did the work.
- Hugging Face Daily PapersPACT: Can Enterprise AI Assistants Be Trusted Under Pressure?2026-09-15