Source author record

Saleh Afroogh

Saleh Afroogh appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

2works
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

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

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

Evaluating LLM Safety Across Child Development Stages: A Simulated Agent Approach

Current safety alignment for Large Language Models (LLMs) implicitly optimizes for a "modal adult user," leaving models vulnerable to distributional shifts in user cognition. We present ChildSafe, a benchmark that quantifies alignment robustness under cognitive shifts corresponding to four developmental stages. Unlike static persona-based evaluations, we introduce a parametric cognitive simulation approach, formalizing developmental stages as hyperparameter constraints (e.g., volatility, context horizon) to generate out-of-distribution interaction traces. We validate these agents against ground-truth human linguistic data (CHILDES) and deploy them across 1,200 multi-turn interactions. Our results reveal a systematic alignment generalization gap: state-of-the-art models exhibit up to 11.5% performance degradation when interacting with early-childhood agents compared to standard baselines. We provide the research community with the validated agent artifacts and evaluation protocols to facilitate robust alignment testing against non-adversarial, cognitively diverse populations.

preprint2021arXiv

A Contextualist Decision Theory

Decision theorists propose a normative theory of rational choice. Traditionally, they assume that they should provide some constant and invariant principles as criteria for rational decisions, and indirectly, for agents. They seek a decision theory that invaribably works for all agents all the time. They believe that a rational agent should follow a certain principle, perhaps the principle of maximizing expected utility everywhere, all the time. As a result of the given context, these principles are considered, in this sense, context-independent. Furthermore, decision theorists usually assume that the relevant agents at work are ideal agents, and they believe that non-ideal agents should follow them so that their decisions qualify as rational. These principles are universal rules. I will refer to this context-independent and universal approach in traditional decision theory as Invariantism. This approach is, implicitly or explicitly, adopted by theories which are proposed on the basis of these two assumptions.