Lie detectors effective on prompted deception in LLMs fail on trained model organisms with verified opposite beliefs, except chain-of-thought judges which retain 0.82 balanced accuracy partly due to verification artifacts.
Building Better Deception Probes Using Targeted Instruction Pairs , url =
2 Pith papers cite this work. Polarity classification is still indexing.
abstract
Linear probes are a promising approach for monitoring AI systems for deceptive behaviour. Previous work has shown that a linear classifier trained on a contrastive instruction pair and a simple dataset can achieve good performance. However, these probes exhibit notable failures even in straightforward scenarios, including spurious correlations and false positives on non-deceptive responses. In this paper, we demonstrate that deception detection is inherently heterogeneous: while a single universal probe achieves modest improvements (+0.032 AUC), post-hoc oracle analysis reveals substantially higher potential (+0.108 AUC) when probes are matched to specific deception types, and synthetic validation experiments suggest this ceiling is achievable a priori when the deception type is known in advance. Our findings reveal that instruction pairs capture deceptive intent rather than content-specific patterns, explaining why prompt choice dominates probe performance (70.6% of variance). Given this heterogeneity, we conclude that organizations should define their specific threat models and deploy appropriately matched probes rather than seeking a universal deception detector.
fields
cs.AI 2years
2026 2verdicts
UNVERDICTED 2representative citing papers
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.
citing papers explorer
-
"Did you lie?" Evaluating Lie Detectors across Model Scale and Belief-Verified Model Organisms
Lie detectors effective on prompted deception in LLMs fail on trained model organisms with verified opposite beliefs, except chain-of-thought judges which retain 0.82 balanced accuracy partly due to verification artifacts.
-
Do Linear Probes Generalize Better in Persona Coordinates?
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.