BeliefShift: Benchmarking Temporal Belief Consistency and Opinion Drift in LLM Agents
LLMs are increasingly used as long-running conversational agents, yet every major benchmark evaluating their memory treats user information as static facts to be stored and retrieved. That's the wrong model. People change their minds, and over extended interactions, phenomena like opinion drift, over-alignment, and confirmation bias start to matter a lot. BeliefShift introduces a longitudinal benchmark designed specifically to evaluate belief dynamics in multi-session LLM interactions. It covers
Record details
Published: 25 March 2026
Source: arXiv
Category: Research
Topics: Bias & fairness · Safety & alignment · Agents & autonomy
Retrieved: 14 July 2026
Related evidence
These records share source-supplied organisations, an exact publisher byline, automatic topics or regions. The reason is shown on every link; related does not mean supporting, agreeing with or verifying this record.
LLM Constitutional Multi-Agent Governance
arXiv · 13 March 2026
Normative Common Ground Replication (NormCoRe): Replication-by-Translation for Studying Norms in Multi-Agent AI
arXiv · 12 March 2026
Frequency-Enhanced Diffusion Models: Curriculum-Guided Semantic Alignment for Zero-Shot Skeleton Action Recognition
arXiv · 10 April 2026
Taming Actor-Observer Asymmetry in Agents via Dialectical Alignment
arXiv · 21 April 2026
FairQE: Multi-Agent Framework for Mitigating Gender Bias in Translation Quality Estimation
arXiv · 23 April 2026
Position: Safety and Fairness in Agentic AI Depend on Interaction Topology, Not on Model Scale or Alignment
arXiv · 1 May 2026
How to cite this record
ethics.ai (25 March 2026), “BeliefShift: Benchmarking Temporal Belief Consistency and Opinion Drift in LLM Agents,” evidence record 6786, https://ethics.ai/record/6786 (originally published by arXiv).
Use and limitations
This page is a stable index and citation surface for a source record. ethics.ai did not author the underlying report and has not independently verified every claim. Automatic topics may be imperfect. For consequential use, quote and cite the original publisher.