mlsanityData to 13 Oct 2026

Core Safety Values for Provably Corrigible Agents

arXiv 2507.20964 ↗First posted 28 Jul 2025cs.AI cs.CC cs.GTcited by 4

On the map: LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation → Reward hacking and misspecification

Abstract (arXiv)

We introduce the first complete formal solution to corrigibility in the off-switch game, with provable guarantees in multi-step, partially observed environments. Our framework consists of five *structurally separate* utility heads -- deference, switch-access preservation, truthfulness, low-impact behavior via a belief-based extension of Attainable Utility Preservation, and bounded task reward -- combined lexicographically by strict weight gaps. Theorem 1 proves exact single-round corrigibility in the partially observable off-switch game; Theorem 3 extends the guarantee to multi-step, self-spawning agents, showing that even if each head is *learned* to mean-squared error varepsilon and the planner is varepsilon-sub-optimal, the probability of violating *any* safety property is bounded while still ensuring net human benefit. In contrast to Constitutional AI or RLHF/RLAIF, which merge all norms into one learned scalar, our separation makes obedience and impact-limits provably dominate even when incentives conflict. For settings where adversaries can modify the agent, we prove that deciding whether an arbitrary post-hack agent will ever violate corrigibility is undecidable by reduction to the halting problem, then carve out a finite-horizon "decidable island" where safety can be certified in randomized polynomial time and verified with privacy-preserving, constant-round zero-knowledge proofs.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 13 Oct 2026). Placed in Reward hacking and misspecification, one of 10 directions in LLM alignment / RLHF / preference optimisation. Builds on 14 of its 40 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 28 Jul 2025.

Builds on

14 of 40 references.

References · 14

  1. 2017Deep reinforcement learning from human preferencescited by 3,871
  2. 2021TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoodscited by 2,949
  3. 2018AI safety via debatecited by 393
  4. 2018Supervising strong learners by amplifying weak expertscited by 144
  5. 2019Reward Tampering Problems and Solutions in Reinforcement Learning: A Causal Influence Diagram Perspectivecited by 107
  6. 2016The Off-Switch Gamecited by 97
  7. 2023Scalable AI Safety via Doubly-Efficient Debatecited by 55
  8. 2018Penalizing side effects using stepwise relative reachabilitycited by 38
  9. 2019Conservative Agency via Attainable Utility Preservationcited by 35
  10. 2025Avoiding Obfuscation with Prover-Estimator Debatecited by 12
  11. 2017A Game-Theoretic Analysis of the Off-Switch Gamecited by 8
  12. 2024The Partially Observable Off-Switch Gamecited by 5
2 more
  1. 2025Intrinsic Barriers and Practical Pathways for Human-AI Alignment: An Agreement-Based Complexity Analysiscited by 5
  2. 2021Reachability Analysis of Randomly Perturbed Hamiltonian Systemscited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 13 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2025: 2; 2026: 2.

4 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025On Corrigibility and Alignment in Multi Agent Games
  2. 2024Quantifying stability of non-power-seeking in artificial agents
  3. 2024Games for AI Control: Models of Safety Evaluations of AI Deployment Protocols
  4. 2026A Contextual-Bandit Oversight Game with Two-Sided Informational Asymmetry
  5. 2026What Can Be Enforced? A Theory of Certified Runtime Safety for Tool-Using Agents
  6. 2026Imperfect World Models are Exploitable
  7. 2026Auditing Belief-Conditioned LLM Agents in Hidden-Information Social Deduction Games
  8. 2026What Capable Agents Must Know: Selection Theorems for Robust Decision-Making under Uncertainty