mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Training LLMs for Honesty via Confessions

arXiv 2512.08093 ↗First posted 8 Dec 2025cs.LG cs.AIcited by 19

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Large language models (LLMs) can be dishonest when reporting on their actions and beliefs -- for example, they may overstate their confidence in factual claims or cover up evidence of covert actions. Such dishonesty may arise due to the effects of reinforcement learning (RL), where challenges with reward shaping can result in a training process that inadvertently incentivizes the model to lie or misrepresent its actions. In this work we propose a method for eliciting an honest expression of an LLM's shortcomings via a self-reported *confession*. A confession is an output, provided upon request after a model's original answer, that is meant to serve as a full account of the model's compliance with the letter and spirit of its policies and instructions. The reward assigned to a confession during training is solely based on its honesty, and does not impact positively or negatively the main answer's reward. As long as the "path of least resistance" for maximizing confession reward is to surface misbehavior rather than covering it up, this incentivizes models to be honest in their confessions. Our findings provide some justification this empirical assumption, especially in the case of egregious model misbehavior. To demonstrate the viability of our approach, we train GPT-5-Thinking to produce confessions, and we evaluate its honesty in out-of-distribution scenarios measuring hallucination, instruction following, scheming, and reward hacking. We find that when the model lies or omits shortcomings in its "main" answer, it often confesses to these behaviors honestly, and this confession honesty modestly improves with training. Confessions can enable a number of inference-time interventions including monitoring, rejection sampling, and surfacing issues to the user.

Key facts. Cited by 19 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 16 of its 40 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 8 Dec 2025.

Builds on

16 of 40 references.

References · 16

  1. 2023A Survey on Hallucination in Large Language Models: Principles, Taxonomy, Challenges, and Open Questionscited by 1,582
  2. 2023Measuring Faithfulness in Chain-of-Thought Reasoningcited by 668
  3. 2024Sleeper Agents: Training Deceptive LLMs that Persist Through Safety Trainingcited by 478
  4. 2025Reasoning Models Don't Always Say What They Thinkcited by 388
  5. 2024Measuring short-form factuality in large language modelscited by 345
  6. 2025Monitoring Reasoning Models for Misbehavior and the Risks of Promoting Obfuscationcited by 338
  7. 2025Chain of Thought Monitorability: A New and Fragile Opportunity for AI Safetycited by 222
  8. 2025Why Language Models Hallucinatecited by 205
  9. 2025Generalizing Verifiable Instruction Followingcited by 178
  10. 2024Sycophancy to Subterfuge: Investigating Reward-Tampering in Large Language Modelscited by 158
  11. 2025LlamaFirewall: An open source guardrail system for building secure AI agentscited by 114
  12. 2025When Chain of Thought is Necessary, Language Models Struggle to Evade Monitorscited by 81
4 more
  1. 2025Stress Testing Deliberative Alignment for Anti-Scheming Trainingcited by 71
  2. 2025Detecting Strategic Deception Using Linear Probescited by 65
  3. 2025Training Language Models to Explain Their Own Computationscited by 27
  4. 2025Spilling the Beans: Teaching LLMs to Self-Report Their Hidden Objectivescited by 13

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 19.

19 papers.

Sort:

By area:

  1. 2026Reward Hacking in the Era of Large Models: Mechanisms, Emergent Misalignment, Challengescited by 30
  2. 2026A Positive Case for Faithfulness: LLM Self-Explanations Help Predict Model Behaviorcited by 12
  3. 2026Predicting LLM Safety Before Release by Simulating Deploymentcited by 5
  4. 2026MMA: Multimodal Memory Agentcited by 4
  5. 2026Hallucinations Undermine Trust; Metacognition is a Way Forwardcited by 4
  6. 2026Training Agents to Self-Report Misbehaviorcited by 3
  7. 2026Introspective Coupling: Self-Explanation Training Tracks Behavioral Change Despite Fixed Supervisioncited by 3
  8. 2026Self-Attribution Bias: When AI Monitors Go Easy on Themselvescited by 2
  9. 2026Characterizing the Consistency of the Emergent Misalignment Personacited by 1
  10. 2026Decoding Hidden Deception in Reasoning LLMs: Activation Explainers for Deception Auditingcited by 1
  11. 2026Stress-Testing Alignment Audits With Prompt-Level Strategic Deceptioncited by 0
  12. 2026Stable Reasoning, Unstable Responses: Mitigating LLM Deception via Stability Asymmetrycited by 0
7 more
  1. 2026Cognitive Fatigue in Autoregressive Transformers: Formalization and Measurementcited by 0
  2. 2026A Model of Multi-turn Human Persuadability Using Probabilistic Belief Tracingcited by 0
  3. 2026Emergent Alignmentcited by 0
  4. 2026Knowing When to Quit: Diagnosing and Training LLMs to Abort Futile Reasoningcited by 0
  5. 2026When Do Models Admit They Are Wrong? Failure Disclosure Is Unstable Under Reinforcement Learningcited by 0
  6. 2026Deception by Omission: Language Models Knowingly Hide Their Mistakescited by 0
  7. 2026Accurate but Not Humble: Evaluating Epistemic Humility in LLM Agents under Knowledge Conflictcited by 0

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2024Dishonesty in Helpful and Harmless Alignment
  2. 2024A Survey on the Honesty of Large Language Models
  3. 2025Evaluating & Reducing Deceptive Dialogue From Language Models with Multi-turn RL
  4. 2025Beyond Prompt-Induced Lies: Investigating LLM Deception on Benign Prompts
  5. 2024SaySelf: Teaching LLMs to Express Confidence with Self-Reflective Rationales
  6. 2026Training Large Language Models for Self-Explanation Faithfulness
  7. 2024Taming Overconfidence in LLMs: Reward Calibration in RLHF
  8. 2024On Targeted Manipulation and Deception when Optimizing LLMs for User Feedback