AI Deception: Risks, Dynamics, and Controls
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
As intelligence increases, so does its shadow. AI deception, in which systems induce false beliefs to secure self-beneficial outcomes, has evolved from a speculative concern to an empirically demonstrated risk across language models, AI agents, and emerging frontier systems. This project provides a comprehensive and up-to-date overview of the AI deception field, covering its core concepts, methodologies, genesis, and potential mitigations. First, we identify a formal definition of AI deception, grounded in signaling theory from studies of animal deception. We then review existing empirical studies and associated risks, highlighting deception as a sociotechnical safety challenge. We organize the landscape of AI deception research as a deception cycle, consisting of two key components: deception emergence and deception treatment. Deception emergence reveals the mechanisms underlying AI deception: systems with sufficient capability and incentive potential inevitably engage in deceptive behaviors when triggered by external conditions. Deception treatment, in turn, focuses on detecting and addressing such behaviors. On deception emergence, we analyze incentive foundations across three hierarchical levels and identify three essential capability preconditions required for deception. We further examine contextual triggers, including supervision gaps, distributional shifts, and environmental pressures. On deception treatment, we conclude detection methods covering benchmarks and evaluation protocols in static and interactive settings. Building on the three core factors of deception emergence, we outline potential mitigation strategies and propose auditing approaches that integrate technical, community, and governance efforts to address sociotechnical challenges and future AI risks. To support ongoing work in this area, we release a living resource at www.deceptionsurvey.com.
Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 27 Nov 2025.
Builds on
0 of 0 references.
No references here yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2025: 1; 2026: 6.
7 papers.
- 2026MonitorBench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Chain-of-Thought Monitorability in Large Language Modelscited by 8
- 2026Linear Probe Accuracy Scales with Model Size and Benefits from Multi-Layer Ensemblingcited by 4
- 2025Debate with Images: Detecting Deceptive Behaviors in Multimodal Large Language Modelscited by 1
- 2026Steerability of Instrumental-Convergence Tendencies in LLMscited by 1
- 2026Stable Reasoning, Unstable Responses: Mitigating LLM Deception via Stability Asymmetrycited by 0
- 2026DECOR: Auditing LLM Deception via Information Manipulation Theorycited by 0
- 2026Local Sparsity Enables Unsupervised LLM Safety Detectioncited by 0
- 2026Local Sparsity Enables Unsupervised LLM Safety Detection17 Sep 2026
- 2026DECOR: Auditing LLM Deception via Information Manipulation Theory19 May 2026
- 2026Linear Probe Accuracy Scales with Model Size and Benefits from Multi-Layer Ensembling15 Apr 2026
- 2026MonitorBench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Chain-of-Thought Monitorability in Large Language Models30 Mar 2026
- 2026Stable Reasoning, Unstable Responses: Mitigating LLM Deception via Stability Asymmetry27 Mar 2026
- 2026Steerability of Instrumental-Convergence Tendencies in LLMs4 Jan 2026
- 2025Debate with Images: Detecting Deceptive Behaviors in Multimodal Large Language Models29 Nov 2025