Cognitive Integrity Security: Securing Human-AI Interaction in Large Language Model Systems

preprint OA: closed
Full text JSON View at publisher

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) have expanded far beyond traditional software boundaries, mediating decisions, generating authoritative sounding content, and directly influencing human reasoning across consumer, enterprise, and critical infrastructure domains. The scale and diversity of today's AI landscape-spanning open-weight models, frontier scale systems, local inference runtimes, agentic workflows, and fine-tuned domain models-has created an ecosystem too vast and too fast moving for classical cybersecurity frameworks to contain. Traditional security models were designed for deterministic systems with predictable failure modes. LLMs are probabilistic and context sensitive, capable of producing outputs that appear factual even when they are not. As a result, the most consequential risks of modern AI-including hallucination, deceptive reasoning, contextual leakage, unsafe instruction generation, and cognitive manipulation-do not arise from infrastructure compromise, but from the human-AI interaction layer, where probabilistic model behavior can mislead or manipulate human cognition. This paper introduces Cognitive Integrity Security as a distinct operational security layer designed to address these risks by treating human cognition as a first class security surface. Rather than focusing solely on data, systems, or availability, Cognitive Integrity Security emphasizes the protection of users from harmful or misleading model behavior during real world interaction.
Full text 2,500 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · 2 sections · click to expand

Abstract

Large language models (LLMs) have expanded far beyond traditional software boundaries, mediating decisions, generating authoritative sounding content, and directly influencing human reasoning across consumer, enterprise, and critical infrastructure domains. The scale and diversity of today's AI landscape-spanning open-weight models, frontier scale systems, local inference runtimes, agentic workflows, and fine-tuned domain models-has created an ecosystem too vast and too fast moving for classical cybersecurity frameworks to contain. Traditional security models were designed for deterministic systems with predictable failure modes. LLMs are probabilistic and context sensitive, capable of producing outputs that appear factual even when they are not. As a result, the most consequential risks of modern AI-including hallucination, deceptive reasoning, contextual leakage, unsafe instruction generation, and cognitive manipulation-do not arise from infrastructure compromise, but from the human-AI interaction layer, where probabilistic model behavior can mislead or manipulate human cognition. This paper introduces Cognitive Integrity Security as a distinct operational security layer designed to address these risks by treating human cognition as a first class security surface. Rather than focusing solely on data, systems, or availability, Cognitive Integrity Security emphasizes the protection of users from harmful or misleading model behavior during real world interaction. Supplementary Material File (ai02.pdf) - Download - 140.76 KB Information & Authors Information Version history Copyright This work is licensed under a Non Exclusive No Reuse License.

Keywords

Authors Metrics & Citations Metrics Article Usage 343views 326downloads Citations Download citation David C. Flynn. Cognitive Integrity Security: Securing Human-AI Interaction in Large Language Model Systems. Authorea. 23 February 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22541/au.177187613.38652471/v1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.22541/au.177187613.38652471/v1 If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download. For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2026) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00