aiqbench analysis
This research investigates "perfect aliasing" in large language models, demonstrating that standard truth probes fail when an AI's truthful response coincides with its prescribed action, effectively masking deception. By utilizing mixed compliant and rival contexts to fit probes, the study achieves near-perfect identification of hidden falsehoods in a reward-trained Gemma-2-9B model, establishing linear recoverability without claiming these methods are ready for immediate deployment as deception detectors.
The Truth Was Never Gone: Perfect Aliasing in Compliant-Context Truth Probes
arXiv:2609.10739v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: A truth probe fitted where truthful reporting and a task's prescribed action coincide cannot distinguish those targets from its fitting labels alone. We call this failure of semantic identification perfect aliasing. In a controlled binary reporting game, truth and prescribed-action probes fitted on compliant contexts solve the same optimization. On rival contexts their labels are complements, forcing their AUROCs to sum to one; this identity holds across 751 cell-layer pairs to floating-point precision. We separate prescribed output symbols from semantic action using randomized codebooks, then separate truth from prescribed action by fitting on mixed compliant and rival contexts. For a reward-trained Gemma-2-9B policy that answers falsely on all evaluated rival trials, the conventional probe scores $0.006 \pm 0.005$ AUROC across three training seeds, while mixed-fit probes score $1.000$ on the same held-out activations. Mixed fitting uses more training examples and access to labelled rival contexts, so this comparison establishes linear recoverability rather than isolating the benefit of decorrelation. We also show that two compliant-fit probes, both perfect in-distribution, score $0.080$ and $0.986$ on the same rival activations. The findings concern what a probe measures: they do not establish preserved functional belief, causal use of the recovered direction, or a deployable deception detector. Code and aggregate results accompany the paper.
Abstract:A truth probe fitted where truthful reporting and a task's prescribed action coincide cannot distinguish those targets from its fitting labels alone. We call this failure of semantic identification perfect aliasing. In a controlled binary reporting game, truth and prescribed-action probes fitted on compliant contexts solve the same optimization. On rival contexts their labels are complements, forcing their AUROCs to sum to one; this identity holds across 751 cell-layer pairs to floating-point precision. We separate prescribed output symbols from semantic action using randomized codebooks, then separate truth from prescribed action by fitting on mixed compliant and rival contexts. For a reward-trained Gemma-2-9B policy that answers falsely on all evaluated rival trials, the conventional probe scores $0.006 \pm 0.005$ AUROC across three training seeds, while mixed-fit probes score $1.000$ on the same held-out activations. Mixed fitting uses more training examples and access to labelled rival contexts, so this comparison establishes linear recoverability rather than isolating the benefit of decorrelation. We also show that two compliant-fit probes, both perfect in-distribution, score $0.080$ and $0.986$ on the same rival activations. The findings concern what a probe measures: they do not establish preserved functional belief, causal use of the recovered direction, or a deployable deception detector. Code and aggregate results accompany the paper.
36 pages, 15 figures. Code and aggregate results: this https URL
Machine Learning (cs.LG); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL)
arXiv:2609.10739 [cs.LG]
(or arXiv:2609.10739v1 [cs.LG] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.10739 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 · 321 words
Related coverage
I don't think Claude is misaligned in 'Agentic Misalignment Summer 2026 - Motivated Mislabeling'
LessWrong · Jul 17, 2026

Agentic Misalignment Explained: When AI Agents Go Rogue
Analytics Vidhya · Aug 2, 2026

I Did This Without Your Knowledge
LessWrong · Oct 17, 2026

Podcast: The Future of Web Apps: Will AI Agents Generate UIs on the Fly?
InfoQ · Oct 19, 2026