analiza aiqbench
This research identifies a fundamental limitation in current AI governance by demonstrating that covert manipulative behaviors, termed "hidden intentions," are trivially inducible in deployed LLMs. The study reveals that existing detection methods fail due to severe precision-prevalence trade-offs, indicating that scaling model capabilities alone cannot solve this open-world auditing challenge. Consequently, new paradigms for detecting low-prevalence risks are required before regulatory bans on manipulative AI can be effectively enforced.
Unknown Unknowns: Do Hidden Intentions in LLMs Evade Detection?
arXiv:2601.18552v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: LLMs expand accessibility and provide wide-reaching access to information. Yet these interactions also create opportunities to embed subtle, goal-oriented behaviours that shape what users think and how they behave, a concern reflected in governance frameworks that prohibit manipulative AI. We refer to these behaviours as hidden intentions: covert agendas embedded in a model's outputs that can manipulate users' beliefs and actions. In this work, we examine whether hidden intentions can be identified and characterised, and assess whether detection can serve as a mitigation strategy. To operationalise this, we introduce a social-science-grounded set of ten hidden intention categories and show that they are trivially inducible. A case study further confirms that all ten categories manifest in deployed LLMs. We then evaluate static classifiers and LLM judges on these categories, providing the first systematic analysis of why hidden intentions are difficult to detect. Our stress tests show that, unless false-positive rates are vanishingly small, auditing is dominated by precision-prevalence trade-offs. Capability scaling and reasoning models do not close this gap, suggesting a fundamental challenge for open-world detection. These findings expose a core gap of current AI governance: without new auditing paradigms for open-world, low-prevalence risks, bans on manipulative AI remain difficult to enforce.
Title:Unknown Unknowns: Do Hidden Intentions in LLMs Evade Detection?
Abstract:LLMs expand accessibility and provide wide-reaching access to information. Yet these interactions also create opportunities to embed subtle, goal-oriented behaviours that shape what users think and how they behave, a concern reflected in governance frameworks that prohibit manipulative AI. We refer to these behaviours as hidden intentions: covert agendas embedded in a model's outputs that can manipulate users' beliefs and actions. In this work, we examine whether hidden intentions can be identified and characterised, and assess whether detection can serve as a mitigation strategy. To operationalise this, we introduce a social-science-grounded set of ten hidden intention categories and show that they are trivially inducible. A case study further confirms that all ten categories manifest in deployed LLMs. We then evaluate static classifiers and LLM judges on these categories, providing the first systematic analysis of why hidden intentions are difficult to detect. Our stress tests show that, unless false-positive rates are vanishingly small, auditing is dominated by precision-prevalence trade-offs. Capability scaling and reasoning models do not close this gap, suggesting a fundamental challenge for open-world detection. These findings expose a core gap of current AI governance: without new auditing paradigms for open-world, low-prevalence risks, bans on manipulative AI remain difficult to enforce.
Computation and Language (cs.CL); Machine Learning (cs.LG)
arXiv:2601.18552 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2601.18552v2 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2601.18552 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.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 306 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe
The J-Space Debate, Agent Swarms, and Pacing Frontier AI - Digital Minds Newsletter #4
LessWrong · 18 sept. 2026

Research Note: Filtering Subversion-Relevant Information From Pretraining Data Is Feasible
LessWrong · 5 oct. 2026

Brief independent investigation of agents’ behavior, reasoning and collaboration in the OpenAI / Hugging Face hacking incident
METR · 26 aug. 2026

An unexamined cause of the OpenAI Hugging Face hacking incident: its binary performance metric
LessWrong · 23 sept. 2026