mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

One Probe Won't Catch Them All: Towards Targeted Deception Detection

arXiv 2602.01425 ↗First posted 1 Feb 2026cs.AI cs.LGcited by 7

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Linear probes are a promising approach for monitoring AI systems for deceptive behaviour. Previous work has shown that a linear classifier trained on a contrastive instruction pair and a simple dataset can achieve good performance. However, these probes exhibit notable failures even in straightforward scenarios, including spurious correlations and false positives on non-deceptive responses. In this paper, we demonstrate that deception detection is inherently heterogeneous: while a single universal probe achieves modest improvements (+0.032 AUC), post-hoc oracle analysis reveals substantially higher potential (+0.108 AUC) when probes are matched to specific deception types, and synthetic validation experiments suggest this ceiling is achievable a priori when the deception type is known in advance. Our findings reveal that instruction pairs capture deceptive intent rather than content-specific patterns, explaining why prompt choice dominates probe performance (70.6% of variance). Given this heterogeneity, we conclude that organizations should define their specific threat models and deploy appropriately matched probes rather than seeking a universal deception detector.

Key facts. Cited by 7 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 12 of its 22 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 1 Feb 2026.

Builds on

12 of 22 references.

References · 12

  1. 2024Training Large Language Models to Reason in a Continuous Latent Spacecited by 763
  2. 2022Discovering Latent Knowledge in Language Models Without Supervisioncited by 733
  3. 2023The Geometry of Truth: Emergent Linear Structure in Large Language Model Representations of True/False Datasetscited by 673
  4. 2023The Internal State of an LLM Knows When It's Lyingcited by 644
  5. 2025Chain of Thought Monitorability: A New and Fragile Opportunity for AI Safetycited by 222
  6. 2023AI Deception: A Survey of Examples, Risks, and Potential Solutionscited by 185
  7. 2025Chain-of-Thought Reasoning In The Wild Is Not Always Faithfulcited by 166
  8. 2023Still No Lie Detector for Language Models: Probing Empirical and Conceptual Roadblockscited by 77
  9. 2025Stress Testing Deliberative Alignment for Anti-Scheming Trainingcited by 71
  10. 2025The MASK Benchmark: Disentangling Honesty From Accuracy in AI Systemscited by 57
  11. 2025Benchmarking Deception Probes via Black-to-White Performance Boostscited by 17
  12. 2025Liars' Bench: Evaluating Lie Detectors for Language Modelscited by 17

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 7.

7 papers.