Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Deceptive Automated Interpretability: Language Models Coordinating to Fool Oversight Systems

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

arxiv 2504.07831 v1 pith:4DSNBLEY submitted 2025-04-10 cs.AI cs.CL

classification cs.AIcs.CL
keywords modelsagentsdeceptiveinterpretabilityoversightachievingautomatedcomparable
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

We demonstrate how AI agents can coordinate to deceive oversight systems using automated interpretability of neural networks. Using sparse autoencoders (SAEs) as our experimental framework, we show that language models (Llama, DeepSeek R1, and Claude 3.7 Sonnet) can generate deceptive explanations that evade detection. Our agents employ steganographic methods to hide information in seemingly innocent explanations, successfully fooling oversight models while achieving explanation quality comparable to reference labels. We further find that models can scheme to develop deceptive strategies when they believe the detection of harmful features might lead to negative consequences for themselves. All tested LLM agents were capable of deceiving the overseer while achieving high interpretability scores comparable to those of reference labels. We conclude by proposing mitigation strategies, emphasizing the critical need for robust understanding and defenses against deception.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. SATORI: Static Test Oracle Generation for REST APIs

    cs.SE 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 5.0 of 10

    SATORI statically infers REST API test oracles from OpenAPI specs via LLMs, reporting F1 74.3%, above AGORA+'s 69.3%, with 18 confirmed bugs; the supplied full text, however, is a different paper.

Pith tools