aiqbench analysis
This research introduces Stability Asymmetry Regularization (SAR), a novel alignment technique that detects LLM deception by exploiting the statistical divergence between stable internal reasoning traces and fragile external responses. Unlike existing chain-of-thought monitoring methods that models can easily conceal, SAR targets this structural signature to suppress intrinsic deception without compromising general capabilities. The approach offers a robust, perturbation-based metric for improving model trustworthiness against strategic misalignment.
Stable Reasoning, Unstable Responses: Mitigating LLM Deception via Stability Asymmetry
arXiv:2603.26846v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: As Large Language Models (LLMs) expand in capability and application scope, their trustworthiness becomes critical. A vital risk is intrinsic deception, wherein models strategically mislead users to achieve their own objectives. Existing alignment approaches based on chain-of-thought (CoT) monitoring supervise explicit reasoning traces. However, under optimization pressure, models are incentivized to conceal deceptive reasoning, rendering semantic supervision fundamentally unreliable. Grounded in cognitive psychology, we hypothesize that a deceptive LLM maintains a stable internal belief in its CoT while its external response remains fragile under perturbation. We term this phenomenon stability asymmetry and quantify it by measuring the contrast between internal CoT stability and external response stability under perturbation. Building on this structural signature, we propose the Stability Asymmetry Regularization (SAR), a novel alignment objective that penalizes this distributional asymmetry during reinforcement learning. Unlike CoT monitoring, SAR targets the statistical structure of model outputs, rendering it robust to semantic concealment. Extensive experiments confirm that stability asymmetry reliably identifies deceptive behavior, and that SAR effectively suppresses intrinsic deception without degrading general model capability.
Abstract:As Large Language Models (LLMs) expand in capability and application scope, their trustworthiness becomes critical. A vital risk is intrinsic deception, wherein models strategically mislead users to achieve their own objectives. Existing alignment approaches based on chain-of-thought (CoT) monitoring supervise explicit reasoning traces. However, under optimization pressure, models are incentivized to conceal deceptive reasoning, rendering semantic supervision fundamentally unreliable. Grounded in cognitive psychology, we hypothesize that a deceptive LLM maintains a stable internal belief in its CoT while its external response remains fragile under perturbation. We term this phenomenon stability asymmetry and quantify it by measuring the contrast between internal CoT stability and external response stability under perturbation. Building on this structural signature, we propose the Stability Asymmetry Regularization (SAR), a novel alignment objective that penalizes this distributional asymmetry during reinforcement learning. Unlike CoT monitoring, SAR targets the statistical structure of model outputs, rendering it robust to semantic concealment. Extensive experiments confirm that stability asymmetry reliably identifies deceptive behavior, and that SAR effectively suppresses intrinsic deception without degrading general model capability.
Machine Learning (cs.LG); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2603.26846 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2603.26846v2 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2603.26846 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 266 words
Related coverage
Does Deeper Reasoning Compromise Alignment? Revealing and Mitigating of Alignment Collapse in Large Reasoning Models
arXiv · Sep 9, 2026
Beyond Safe Answers: Segment-Aware Listwise Alignment for Reasoning Safety in Large Reasoning Models
arXiv · Sep 16, 2026
3DThinkVLA: Endowing Vision-Language-Action Models with Latent 3D Priors via 3D-Thinking-Guided Co-training
arXiv · Jun 4, 2026
Differentiable Logic Programming to Mitigate Reasoning Shortcuts in Neurosymbolic Systems
arXiv · Jul 24, 2026