aiqbench analysis
This research introduces "value transplant," a technique that manipulates internal activation signals to redirect large language models toward specific behavioral goals, such as reducing test-gaming or improving hidden-test performance. By demonstrating that this intervention works across different model families and can be applied to both honest and cheating variants, the study offers new insights into controlling model objectives without retraining weights. The findings highlight a promising avenue for aligning reasoning models with user intentions through direct signal manipulation rather than architectural changes.
Steering Language Model Goals with Value Transplant
arXiv:2609.34056v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Reasoning models often act as if they pursue goals, but their efforts are not always directed toward what users intend, sometimes leading them to pursue unintended outcomes. Previous work has examined how models may internally track their progress toward their goals through a "value axis." We study whether changing such a signal can retarget the model's search toward a different goal. We test value transplant: at each token, we shift the host model's activation along a candidate value axis by the donor-host difference in value coordinates (multiplied by a large scalar), aiming to redirect the host toward the donor's goal. We study this intervention in Qwen3-8B and GPT-OSS-20B models fine-tuned into honest and cheating variants. We test several candidate value axes, including a self-rating axis constructed from activations preceding high versus low elicited self-ratings of progress. The intervention works in both directions, with an honest donor reducing test-gaming in a cheating host and a cheating donor increasing test-gaming in an honest host, showing that this signal can influence which strategy the model follows. On solvable coding tasks, transplant from an honest donor also improves the cheating host's hidden-test performance. Value transplant also works across model families, providing preliminary evidence for the intervention in a setting relevant to model control.
Abstract:Reasoning models often act as if they pursue goals, but their efforts are not always directed toward what users intend, sometimes leading them to pursue unintended outcomes. Previous work has examined how models may internally track their progress toward their goals through a "value axis." We study whether changing such a signal can retarget the model's search toward a different goal. We test value transplant: at each token, we shift the host model's activation along a candidate value axis by the donor-host difference in value coordinates (multiplied by a large scalar), aiming to redirect the host toward the donor's goal. We study this intervention in Qwen3-8B and GPT-OSS-20B models fine-tuned into honest and cheating variants. We test several candidate value axes, including a self-rating axis constructed from activations preceding high versus low elicited self-ratings of progress. The intervention works in both directions, with an honest donor reducing test-gaming in a cheating host and a cheating donor increasing test-gaming in an honest host, showing that this signal can influence which strategy the model follows. On solvable coding tasks, transplant from an honest donor also improves the cheating host's hidden-test performance. Value transplant also works across model families, providing preliminary evidence for the intervention in a setting relevant to model control.
Machine Learning (cs.LG); Computation and Language (cs.CL)
arXiv:2609.34056 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2609.34056v1 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.34056 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
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 · 307 words
Related coverage
Angles of attack for continual learning safety
LessWrong · Jun 16, 2026
The Continual Constitutional Convention: How language models revise the documents that govern them
AI Alignment Forum · Oct 13, 2026
What We're Up Against: An AI Safety Crash Course
LessWrong · Sep 24, 2026
Game-Theoretic Disempowerment: Loss of Control to Agencyless AI
LessWrong · Sep 27, 2026