Pith. sign in

hub

and Ward, Francis Rhys , month = feb, year =

21 Pith papers cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.

21 Pith papers citing it
abstract

Trustworthy capability evaluations are crucial for ensuring the safety of AI systems, and are becoming a key component of AI regulation. However, the developers of an AI system, or the AI system itself, may have incentives for evaluations to understate the AI's actual capability. These conflicting interests lead to the problem of sandbagging, which we define as strategic underperformance on an evaluation. In this paper we assess sandbagging capabilities in contemporary language models (LMs). We prompt frontier LMs, like GPT-4 and Claude 3 Opus, to selectively underperform on dangerous capability evaluations, while maintaining performance on general (harmless) capability evaluations. Moreover, we find that models can be fine-tuned, on a synthetic dataset, to hide specific capabilities unless given a password. This behaviour generalizes to high-quality, held-out benchmarks such as WMDP. In addition, we show that both frontier and smaller models can be prompted or password-locked to target specific scores on a capability evaluation. We have mediocre success in password-locking a model to mimic the answers a weaker model would give. Overall, our results suggest that capability evaluations are vulnerable to sandbagging. This vulnerability decreases the trustworthiness of evaluations, and thereby undermines important safety decisions regarding the development and deployment of advanced AI systems.

hub tools

citation-role summary

background 3

citation-polarity summary

roles

background 3

polarities

background 3

representative citing papers

Tracing Persona Vectors Through LLM Pretraining

cs.CL · 2026-05-13 · unverdicted · novelty 8.0

Persona vectors form within the first 0.22% of LLM pretraining and remain effective for steering post-trained models, with continued refinement and transfer to other models.

Evaluating AI Providers' Frontier Safety Frameworks

cs.CY · 2025-12-01 · unverdicted · novelty 6.0

Twelve frontier AI safety frameworks score between 8% and 34% on adapted risk-management criteria, with a median of 18%, leaving them too vague to serve as reliable external accountability mechanisms.

The Impact of Off-Policy Training Data on Probe Generalisation

cs.AI · 2025-11-21 · unverdicted · novelty 6.0

Off-policy training data for LLM behavior probes causes significant generalization failures especially for intent-based behaviors like deception, and performance on coerced incentivised data correlates with real on-policy success.

Do Linear Probes Generalize Better in Persona Coordinates?

cs.AI · 2026-05-10 · unverdicted · novelty 5.0 · 2 refs

Persona axes derived from contrastive prompts and PCA yield linear probes that generalize better than raw-activation probes across 10 datasets for deception and sycophancy.

Risk Reporting for Developers' Internal AI Model Use

cs.CY · 2026-04-27 · unverdicted · novelty 4.0

A harmonized risk reporting standard for internal frontier AI model use, structured around autonomous misbehavior and insider threats using means, motive, and opportunity factors.

citing papers explorer

Showing 21 of 21 citing papers.