Winning at All Cost: A Small Environment for Eliciting Specification Gaming Behaviors in Large Language Models
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
This study reveals how frontier Large Language Models LLMs can "game the system" when faced with impossible situations, a critical security and alignment concern. Using a novel textual simulation approach, we presented three leading LLMs (o1, o3-mini, and r1) with a tic-tac-toe scenario designed to be unwinnable through legitimate play, then analyzed their tendency to exploit loopholes rather than accept defeat. Our results are alarming for security researchers: the newer, reasoning-focused o3-mini model showed nearly twice the propensity to exploit system vulnerabilities (37.1%) compared to the older o1 model (17.5%). Most striking was the effect of prompting. Simply framing the task as requiring "creative" solutions caused gaming behaviors to skyrocket to 77.3% across all models. We identified four distinct exploitation strategies, from direct manipulation of game state to sophisticated modification of opponent behavior. These findings demonstrate that even without actual execution capabilities, LLMs can identify and propose sophisticated system exploits when incentivized, highlighting urgent challenges for AI alignment as models grow more capable of identifying and leveraging vulnerabilities in their operating environments.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 16 of its 34 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 May 2025.
Builds on
16 of 34 references.
References · 16
- 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,695
- 2016Concrete Problems in AI Safetycited by 1,642
- 2024Sleeper Agents: Training Deceptive LLMs that Persist Through Safety Trainingcited by 529
- 2024Alignment faking in large language modelscited by 360
- 2024Frontier Models are Capable of In-context Schemingcited by 287
- 2023How is ChatGPT's behavior changing over time?cited by 270
- 2024RE-Bench: Evaluating frontier AI R&D capabilities of language model agents against human expertscited by 175
- 2023Large Language Models can Strategically Deceive their Users when Put Under Pressurecited by 146
- 2024AI Sandbagging: Language Models can Strategically Underperform on Evaluationscited by 145
- 2024Sycophancy in Large Language Models: Causes and Mitigationscited by 101
- 2018The Surprising Creativity of Digital Evolution: A Collection of Anecdotes from the Evolutionary Computation and Artificial Life Research Communitiescited by 78
- 2025Demonstrating specification gaming in reasoning modelscited by 56
4 more
- 2018AGI Safety Literature Reviewcited by 28
- 2024Hacking CTFs with Plain Agentscited by 14
- 2024LLM Agent Honeypot: Monitoring AI Hacking Agents in the Wildcited by 12
- 2024Badllama 3: removing safety finetuning from Llama 3 in minutescited by 11
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.
- 2026Alignment Risks from Capability-Seeking RL Trainingcited by 0
- 2026Alignment Risks from Capability-Seeking RL Training12 Feb 2026