ARBITRA: Robust Document-Level ATT&CK Extraction via Multi-Expert Argumentation

Abstract

Cyber threat intelligence (CTI) reports describe adversary behavior in natural language, but converting them into structured MITRE ATT&CK mappings remains difficult: existing methods decompose reports to sentence-level granularity for extraction, while modern LLMs can work with full reports in a single pass but with noticeable performance degradation. We present ARBITRA, which orchestrates multiple role-specialized LLM experts that propose candidate ATT&CK entities from the full report, which are then verified through a per-candidate quantitative bipolar argumentation framework (QBAF) grounded in document evidence and rationales. We additionally construct reasoning-specialized corpora for fine-tuning so experts can act as effective participants during this verification process. Across ATT&CK extraction benchmarks, ARBITRA reaches a stronger precision-oriented operating point than sentence-level pipelines, recent LLM-based extraction systems, and frontier models including GPT-5.5. Under adversarial perturbations simulating conflicting TTP statements, cross-report contamination, and semantic poisoning, ARBITRA limits mean precision degradation to roughly half that of frontier-model baselines for a more robust extraction.