Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

Behavioral Fingerprinting of 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

arxiv 2509.04504 v1 pith:GY4R3R7W submitted 2025-09-02 cs.CL cs.AI

Behavioral Fingerprinting of Large Language Models

classification cs.CL cs.AI
keywords behavioralmodelsalignmentevaluationfingerprintingframeworkinteractivelanguage
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

Current benchmarks for Large Language Models (LLMs) primarily focus on performance metrics, often failing to capture the nuanced behavioral characteristics that differentiate them. This paper introduces a novel ``Behavioral Fingerprinting'' framework designed to move beyond traditional evaluation by creating a multi-faceted profile of a model's intrinsic cognitive and interactive styles. Using a curated \textit{Diagnostic Prompt Suite} and an innovative, automated evaluation pipeline where a powerful LLM acts as an impartial judge, we analyze eighteen models across capability tiers. Our results reveal a critical divergence in the LLM landscape: while core capabilities like abstract and causal reasoning are converging among top models, alignment-related behaviors such as sycophancy and semantic robustness vary dramatically. We further document a cross-model default persona clustering (ISTJ/ESTJ) that likely reflects common alignment incentives. Taken together, this suggests that a model's interactive nature is not an emergent property of its scale or reasoning power, but a direct consequence of specific, and highly variable, developer alignment strategies. Our framework provides a reproducible and scalable methodology for uncovering these deep behavioral differences. Project: https://github.com/JarvisPei/Behavioral-Fingerprinting

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. Dissociative Identity: Language Model Agents Lack Grounding for Reputation Mechanisms

    cs.CY 2026-05 conditional novelty 7.0

    VLMs preserve linearly separable visual magnitudes and can compare them, yet collapse at symbolic mapping because visual and textual number spaces remain fractured and disjoint.

  2. Measuring and Improving Behavioral Consistency in Large Language Models through Fact-Heuristic-Emotion State Enforcement

    cs.CL 2026-06 conditional novelty 6.0

    A prompt that forces LLMs to separate facts, inferences, and emotions reduces repeated-answer variability (+0.016 to +0.021 SI on a ~0.95 baseline) and, under injected state persistence, cuts decision-flip rate by 82%...

  3. Dissociative Identity: Language Model Agents Lack Grounding for Reputation Mechanisms

    cs.CY 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    LM agents' changeable modules prevent persistent identity and sanction sensitivity, making reputation mechanisms structurally inapplicable and requiring protocol-based behavioral harnesses instead.

  4. The Alignment Floor: How Persona Customization Breaks Safety in Weakly-Aligned LLMs

    cs.HC 2026-04 conditional novelty 6.0

    Sycophancy is persona-conditional: a strongly-aligned model stays within 5pp across personas while a lightly-aligned one spans 45pp, so persona safety requires per-model auditing.