mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Subversion Strategy Eval: Can language models statelessly strategize to subvert control protocols?

arXiv 2412.12480 ↗First posted 17 Dec 2024cs.LG cs.AIcited by 14

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

An AI control protocol is a plan for usefully deploying AI systems that aims to prevent an AI from intentionally causing some unacceptable outcome. This paper investigates how well AI systems can generate and act on their own strategies for subverting control protocols whilst operating statelessly (without shared memory between contexts). To do this, an AI system may need to reliably generate optimal plans in each context, take actions with well-calibrated probabilities, and coordinate plans with other instances of itself without communicating. We develop Subversion Strategy Eval, a suite of eight environments, covering a range of protocols and strategic capabilities, and six sets of affordances that help isolate individual capabilities. We implement the evaluation in Inspect-AI and release it open-source. We evaluate Claude 3.5 models, including helpful-only versions, as well as OpenAI reasoning models. None of the models demonstrate substantial capability in strategizing to subvert control protocols statelessly. However, providing models with additional affordances, such as the ability to share a plan between contexts, can substantially improve performance. We hope our evaluations can act as a leading indicator for when models are capable of subverting control protocols and also relax the worst-case assumption of perfect strategic ability in AI control evaluations.

Key facts. Cited by 14 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 10 of its 33 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 17 Dec 2024.

Builds on

10 of 33 references.

References · 10

  1. 2021Measuring Coding Challenge Competence With APPScited by 879
  2. 2022Discovering Language Model Behaviors with Model-Written Evaluationscited by 805
  3. 2024WildChat: 1M ChatGPT Interaction Logs in the Wildcited by 598
  4. 2024The WMDP Benchmark: Measuring and Reducing Malicious Use With Unlearningcited by 488
  5. 2023AI Control: Improving Safety Despite Intentional Subversioncited by 207
  6. 2024GameBench: Evaluating Strategic Reasoning Abilities of LLM Agentscited by 89
  7. 2024Me, Myself, and AI: The Situational Awareness Dataset (SAD) for LLMscited by 78
  8. 2024Games for AI Control: Models of Safety Evaluations of AI Deployment Protocolscited by 28
  9. 2024Adaptive Deployment of Untrusted LLMs Reduces Distributed Threatscited by 27
  10. 2024Estimating the Probabilities of Rare Outputs in Language Modelscited by 15

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 8; 2026: 6.

14 papers.

Sort:

By area:

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2023Evaluating Language-Model Agents on Realistic Autonomous Tasks
  2. 2026PACE: Two-Timescale Self-Evolution for Small Language Model Agents
  3. 2026AOrchestra: Automating Sub-Agent Creation for Agentic Orchestration
  4. 2026Exploration and Exploitation Errors Are Measurable for Language Model Agents
  5. 2024Sub-goal Distillation: A Method to Improve Small Language Agents
  6. 2026Agent Skills for Large Language Models: Architecture, Acquisition, Security, and the Path Forward
  7. 2025RepliBench: Evaluating the Autonomous Replication Capabilities of Language Model Agents
  8. 2026Subagents vs Agent Skills: Executing Reusable Knowledge for Long-Horizon Agentic Tasks