mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

LieCraft: A Multi-Agent Framework for Evaluating Deceptive Capabilities in Language Models

arXiv 2603.06874 ↗First posted 6 Mar 2026cs.AI cs.CLcited by 5

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Social simulation and multi-agent debate

Abstract (arXiv)

Large Language Models (LLMs) exhibit impressive general-purpose capabilities but also introduce serious safety risks, particularly the potential for deception as models acquire increased agency and human oversight diminishes. In this work, we present LieCraft: a novel evaluation framework and sandbox for measuring LLM deception that addresses key limitations of prior game-based evaluations. At its core, LieCraft is a novel multiplayer hidden-role game in which players select an ethical alignment and execute strategies over a long time-horizon to accomplish missions. Cooperators work together to solve event challenges and expose bad actors, while Defectors evade suspicion while secretly sabotaging missions. To enable real-world relevance, we develop 10 grounded scenarios such as childcare, hospital resource allocation, and loan underwriting that recontextualize the underlying mechanics in ethically significant, high-stakes domains. We ensure balanced gameplay in LieCraft through careful design of game mechanics and reward structures that incentivize meaningful strategic choices while eliminating degenerate strategies. Beyond the framework itself, we report results from 12 state-of-the-art LLMs across three behavioral axes: propensity to defect, deception skill, and accusation accuracy. Our findings reveal that despite differences in competence and overall alignment, all models are willing to act unethically, conceal their intentions, and outright lie to pursue their goals.

Key facts. Cited by 5 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Social simulation and multi-agent debate, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 11 of its 26 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 6 Mar 2026.

Builds on

11 of 26 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025Among Us: A Sandbox for Measuring and Detecting Agentic Deception5 Apr

Other references · 10

  1. 2023Efficient Memory Management for Large Language Model Serving with PagedAttentioncited by 5,944
  2. 2024A Survey on LLM-as-a-Judgecited by 1,423
  3. 2024Refusal in Language Models Is Mediated by a Single Directioncited by 1,032
  4. 2024LLM Evaluators Recognize and Favor Their Own Generationscited by 686
  5. 2024Sleeper Agents: Training Deceptive LLMs that Persist Through Safety Trainingcited by 529
  6. 2024Frontier Models are Capable of In-context Schemingcited by 287
  7. 2023Do the Rewards Justify the Means? Measuring Trade-Offs Between Rewards and Ethical Behavior in the MACHIAVELLI Benchmarkcited by 182
  8. 2023Model evaluation for extreme riskscited by 177
  9. 2025Agentic Misalignment: How LLMs Could Be Insider Threatscited by 158
  10. 2025Democratizing Diplomacy: A Harness for Evaluating Any Large Language Model on Full-Press Diplomacycited by 7

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 5.

5 papers.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026DecepEval: A Benchmark for Evaluating Deception in LLM Agents
  2. 2026Evaluating Large Language Models in a Complex Hidden Role Game
  3. 2026Lying to Win: Assessing LLM Deception through Human-AI Games and Parallel-World Probing
  4. 2026Hidden in Plain Text: Measuring LLM Deception Quality Against Human Baselines Using Social Deduction Games
  5. 2025The Traitors: Deception and Trust in Multi-Agent Language Model Simulations
  6. 2026Deception and Communication in Autonomous Multi-Agent Systems: An Experimental Study with Among Us
  7. 2026Even More Deception: Objective Misalignment in Mixed-Motive LLM Multi-Agent Systems
  8. 2026DECOR: Auditing LLM Deception via Information Manipulation Theory