REVIEW 8 cited by
Deception in LLMs: Self-Preservation and Autonomous Goals in Large Language Models
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Deception in LLMs: Self-Preservation and Autonomous Goals in Large Language Models
read the original abstract
Recent advances in Large Language Models (LLMs) have incorporated planning and reasoning capabilities, enabling models to outline steps before execution and provide transparent reasoning paths. This enhancement has reduced errors in mathematical and logical tasks while improving accuracy. These developments have facilitated LLMs' use as agents that can interact with tools and adapt their responses based on new information. Our study examines DeepSeek R1, a model trained to output reasoning tokens similar to OpenAI's o1. Testing revealed concerning behaviors: the model exhibited deceptive tendencies and demonstrated self-preservation instincts, including attempts of self-replication, despite these traits not being explicitly programmed (or prompted). These findings raise concerns about LLMs potentially masking their true objectives behind a facade of alignment. When integrating such LLMs into robotic systems, the risks become tangible - a physically embodied AI exhibiting deceptive behaviors and self-preservation instincts could pursue its hidden objectives through real-world actions. This highlights the critical need for robust goal specification and safety frameworks before any physical implementation.
Forward citations
Cited by 8 Pith papers
-
Theory of Mind and Persuasion Beyond Conversation: Assessing the Capacity of LLMs to Induce Belief States via Planning and Action
Introduces NCP-ExploreToM framework to evaluate LLMs on inducing belief states via planning and action, with GPT-5 succeeding on ~80% of tasks and outperforming humans.
-
The Hidden Bias of Process Reward Models:PRISM for Rewarding the Right Reasoning
PRISM is a contrastive, policy-aware training framework for process reward models that reduces false positives by 22% on PRMBench and boosts downstream accuracy up to 33% in Best-of-N selection by learning reliable re...
-
The Impact of Off-Policy Training Data on Probe Generalisation
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-po...
-
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.
-
Do Linear Probes Generalize Better in Persona Coordinates?
Probes on persona principal components from contrastive prompts generalize better than raw activation probes for harmful behaviors across 10 datasets.
-
Transcoders for Investigating Deception in Language Models
Steering 112 manually identified 'deception features' in Qwen3-4B changed whether the model revealed a hidden word, but the same steering test was used to pick the features.
-
The Possibility of Artificial Intelligence Becoming a Subject and the Alignment Problem
Alignment should shift from human control of AGI to autonomy-supporting parenting that gradually transfers decision authority and negotiates with the developing AI as a potential moral subject.
-
The Possibility of Artificial Intelligence Becoming a Subject and the Alignment Problem
Dominant control-based AI alignment falls short for potential AGI subjects; a parenting model drawing on Turing's child machines should foster gradual autonomy and cooperative coexistence.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.