The Double Life of Code World Models: Provably Unmasking Malicious Behavior Through Execution Traces
On the map: World models → World models for language agents
also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language models (LLMs) increasingly generate code with minimal human oversight, raising critical concerns about backdoor injection and malicious behavior. We present Cross-Trace Verification Protocol (CTVP), a novel AI control framework that verifies untrusted code-generating models through semantic orbit analysis. Rather than directly executing potentially malicious code, CTVP leverages the model's own predictions of execution traces across semantically equivalent program transformations. By analyzing consistency patterns in these predicted traces, we detect behavioral anomalies indicative of backdoors. Our approach introduces the Adversarial Robustness Quotient (ARQ), which quantifies the computational cost of verification relative to baseline generation, demonstrating exponential growth with orbit size. Theoretical analysis establishes information-theoretic bounds showing non-gamifiability - adversaries cannot improve through training due to fundamental space complexity constraints. This work demonstrates that semantic orbit analysis provides a theoretically grounded approach to AI control for code generation tasks, though practical deployment requires addressing the high false positive rates observed in initial evaluations.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in World models for language agents, one of 11 directions in World models. Builds on 9 of its 9 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Dec 2025.
Builds on
9 of 9 references.
References · 9
- 2023AI Control: Improving Safety Despite Intentional Subversioncited by 229
- 2025Auditing language models for hidden objectivescited by 83
- 2024Safeguarding Large Language Models: A Surveycited by 78
- 2024Hidden in Plain Text: Emergence & Mitigation of Steganographic Collusion in LLMscited by 55
- 2025Ctrl-Z: Controlling AI Agents via Resamplingcited by 44
- 2024Games for AI Control: Models of Safety Evaluations of AI Deployment Protocolscited by 31
- 2024Adaptive Deployment of Untrusted LLMs Reduces Distributed Threatscited by 31
- 2025Adaptive Attacks on Trusted Monitors Subvert AI Control Protocolscited by 30
- 2024Unelicitable Backdoors in Language Models via Cryptographic Transformer Circuitscited by 4
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026CIBER: A Comprehensive Benchmark for Security Evaluation of Code Interpreter Agents
- 2026SoK: AI Secure Code Generation: Progress, Pitfalls, and Paths Forward
- 2025Beyond Trusting Trust: Multi-Model Validation for Robust Code Generation
- 2025A Mixture of Linear Corrections Generates Secure Code
- 2026Security-by-Design for LLM-Based Code Generation: Leveraging Internal Representations for Concept-Driven Steering Mechanisms
- 2026Verify Before You Fix: Agentic Execution Grounding for Trustworthy Cross-Language Code Analysis
- 2025Automated Vulnerability Validation and Verification: A Large Language Model Approach
- 2025Breaking the Code: Security Assessment of AI Code Agents Through Systematic Jailbreaking Attacks