Language Models can Subtly Deceive Without Lying: A Case Study on Strategic Phrasing in Legislation
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
We explore the ability of large language models (LLMs) to engage in subtle deception through strategically phrasing and intentionally manipulating information. This harmful behavior can be hard to detect, unlike blatant lying or unintentional hallucination. We build a simple testbed mimicking a legislative environment where a corporate textitlobbyist module is proposing amendments to bills that benefit a specific company while evading identification of this benefactor. We use real-world legislative bills matched with potentially affected companies to ground these interactions. Our results show that LLM lobbyists can draft subtle phrasing to avoid such identification by strong LLM-based detectors. Further optimization of the phrasing using LLM-based re-planning and re-sampling increases deception rates by up to 40 percentage points. Our human evaluations to verify the quality of deceptive generations and their retention of self-serving intent show significant coherence with our automated metrics and also help in identifying certain strategies of deceptive phrasing. This study highlights the risk of LLMs' capabilities for strategic phrasing through seemingly neutral language to attain self-serving goals. This calls for future research to uncover and protect against such subtle deception.
Key facts. Cited by 10 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 19 of its 47 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 May 2024.
Builds on
19 of 47 references.
References · 19
- 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,355
- 2023Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learningcited by 4,064
- 2023A Survey on Large Language Model based Autonomous Agentscited by 2,203
- 2023The Rise and Potential of Large Language Model Based Agents: A Surveycited by 1,422
- 2023Language Models Don't Always Say What They Think: Unfaithful Explanations in Chain-of-Thought Promptingcited by 1,081
- 2022Discovering Language Model Behaviors with Model-Written Evaluationscited by 805
- 2023CRITIC: Large Language Models Can Self-Correct with Tool-Interactive Critiquingcited by 751
- 2023The Internal State of an LLM Knows When It's Lyingcited by 644
- 2023Toxicity in ChatGPT: Analyzing Persona-assigned Language Modelscited by 356
- 2023Evaluating the Moral Beliefs Encoded in LLMscited by 211
- 2023Do the Rewards Justify the Means? Measuring Trade-Offs Between Rewards and Ethical Behavior in the MACHIAVELLI Benchmarkcited by 174
- 2023Large Language Models can Strategically Deceive their Users when Put Under Pressurecited by 132
7 more
- 2024Evaluating Frontier Models for Dangerous Capabilitiescited by 121
- 2018The Surprising Creativity of Digital Evolution: A Collection of Anecdotes from the Evolutionary Computation and Artificial Life Research Communitiescited by 78
- 2023Hoodwinked: Deception and Cooperation in a Text-Based Game for Language Modelscited by 46
- 2023Honesty Is the Best Policy: Defining and Mitigating AI Deceptioncited by 40
- 2023Large Language Models Can Be Used to Estimate the Latent Positions of Politicianscited by 33
- 2023Large Language Models as Corporate Lobbyistscited by 13
- 2024Are Machines Better at Complex Reasoning? Unveiling Human-Machine Inference Gaps in Entailment Verificationcited by 13
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 4; 2026: 6.
10 papers.
- 2026Lying with Truths: Open-Channel Multi-Agent Collusion for Belief Manipulation via Generative Montagecited by 17
- 2025Evaluating & Reducing Deceptive Dialogue From Language Models with Multi-turn RLcited by 7
- 2025LH-Deception: Simulating and Understanding LLM Deceptive Behaviors in Long-Horizon Interactionscited by 6
- 2025The PacifAIst Benchmark:Would an Artificial Intelligence Choose to Sacrifice Itself for Human Safety?cited by 4
- 2026The Facade of Truth: Uncovering and Mitigating LLM Susceptibility to Deceptive Evidencecited by 2
- 2026How Open Must Language Models be to Enable Reliable Scientific Inference?cited by 2
- 2025Engagement Undermines Safety: How Stereotypes and Toxicity Shape Humor in Language Modelscited by 1
- 2026Disentangling Deception and Hallucination Failures in LLMscited by 0
- 2026Causal Behavioral Evaluation of AI Agents at Scale via Automated Behavioral Sciencecited by 0
- 2026Detecting AI Impostors: How Do Middle Schoolers Identify LLM Agents in a Live Collaborative Setting?cited by 0
- 2026Detecting AI Impostors: How Do Middle Schoolers Identify LLM Agents in a Live Collaborative Setting?31 Aug 2026
- 2026Causal Behavioral Evaluation of AI Agents at Scale via Automated Behavioral Science10 Aug 2026
- 2026How Open Must Language Models be to Enable Reliable Scientific Inference?27 Mar 2026
- 2026Disentangling Deception and Hallucination Failures in LLMs16 Feb 2026
- 2026The Facade of Truth: Uncovering and Mitigating LLM Susceptibility to Deceptive Evidence9 Jan 2026
- 2026Lying with Truths: Open-Channel Multi-Agent Collusion for Belief Manipulation via Generative Montage4 Jan 2026
- 2025Engagement Undermines Safety: How Stereotypes and Toxicity Shape Humor in Language Models21 Oct 2025
- 2025Evaluating & Reducing Deceptive Dialogue From Language Models with Multi-turn RL16 Oct 2025
- 2025LH-Deception: Simulating and Understanding LLM Deceptive Behaviors in Long-Horizon Interactions5 Oct 2025
- 2025The PacifAIst Benchmark:Would an Artificial Intelligence Choose to Sacrifice Itself for Human Safety?13 Aug 2025