Researcher profile

Emanuele La Malfa

Emanuele La Malfa contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
4topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

4 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

Mechanism Design Is Not Enough: Prosocial Agents for Cooperative AI

Ensuring that AI agents behave safely and beneficially when interacting with other parties has emerged as one of the central challenges of modern AI safety. While mechanism design, as the theory of designing rules to align individual and collective objectives, can incentivize cooperative behavior, it is still an open question whether it alone is sufficient to maximize LLM agents' social welfare. This work proves that the answer is negative: drawing from incomplete contract theory, we formally show that when contracts cannot distinguish all relevant future contingencies, there is a strictly positive welfare loss that no realistic mechanism can eliminate. We show that prosocial agents, who weigh others' welfare alongside their own, can close this gap and achieve outcomes that are socially superior and individually beneficial. Experimentally, we show that in multi-agent resource-allocation environments and canonical social dilemmas where agents are powered by large language models, prosociality is beneficial. The implication for AI safety is clear: to enable cooperative interactions at scale, designing adequate mechanisms is not sufficient; agents must be built to be intrinsically prosocial.

preprint2026arXiv

The Attacker in the Mirror: Breaking Self-Consistency in Safety via Anchored Bipolicy Self-Play

Self-play red team is an established approach to improving AI safety in which different instances of the same model play attacker and defender roles in a zero-sum game, i.e., where the attacker tries to jailbreak the defender; if self-play converges to a Nash equilibrium, the model is guaranteed to respond safely within the settings of the game. Although the parameter sharing enforced by the use of the same model for the two roles improves stability and performance, it introduces fundamental theoretical and architectural limitations. We show that the set of Nash equilibria that can be reached corresponds to a broad class of behaviours that includes trivial always refuse strategies and oracle-like defenders, thus limiting practical applicability. We then show that when attacker and defender share and update the same base model, the dynamics collapse to self-consistency, so that attacks do not enforce adversarial pressure on the defender. In response, we propose Anchored Bipolicy Self-Play, which trains distinct role-specific LoRA adapters on top of a frozen base model, thereby maintaining stable optimisation while preserving adversarial pressure through explicit role separation. In relation to standard self-play, we show up to 100x greater parameter efficiency than finetuning and consistent improvements in safety compared to self-play fine-tuned models. We evaluate on Qwen2.5-{3B, 7B,14B}-IT models across widely used safety benchmarks, showing improved robustness without loss of reasoning ability. Cross-play experiments further show that our attacker and defender models are superior to self-play in terms of adversarial defence and safety.

preprint2022arXiv

Deep Neural Networks as Complex Networks

Deep Neural Networks are, from a physical perspective, graphs whose `links` and `vertices` iteratively process data and solve tasks sub-optimally. We use Complex Network Theory (CNT) to represents Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) as directed weighted graphs: within this framework, we introduce metrics to study DNNs as dynamical systems, with a granularity that spans from weights to layers, including neurons. CNT discriminates networks that differ in the number of parameters and neurons, the type of hidden layers and activations, and the objective task. We further show that our metrics discriminate low vs. high performing networks. CNT is a comprehensive method to reason about DNNs and a complementary approach to explain a model's behavior that is physically grounded to networks theory and goes beyond the well-studied input-output relation.

preprint2022arXiv

The King is Naked: on the Notion of Robustness for Natural Language Processing

There is growing evidence that the classical notion of adversarial robustness originally introduced for images has been adopted as a de facto standard by a large part of the NLP research community. We show that this notion is problematic in the context of NLP as it considers a narrow spectrum of linguistic phenomena. In this paper, we argue for semantic robustness, which is better aligned with the human concept of linguistic fidelity. We characterize semantic robustness in terms of biases that it is expected to induce in a model. We study semantic robustness of a range of vanilla and robustly trained architectures using a template-based generative test bed. We complement the analysis with empirical evidence that, despite being harder to implement, semantic robustness can improve performance %gives guarantees for on complex linguistic phenomena where models robust in the classical sense fail.