Stable Reasoning, Unstable Responses: Mitigating LLM Deception via Stability Asymmetry
On the map: LLM reasoning → Prompting and chain-of-thought reasoning
Abstract (arXiv)
As Large Language Models (LLMs) expand in capability and application scope, their trustworthiness becomes critical. A vital risk is intrinsic deception, wherein models strategically mislead users to achieve their own objectives. Existing alignment approaches based on chain-of-thought (CoT) monitoring supervise explicit reasoning traces. However, under optimization pressure, models are incentivized to conceal deceptive reasoning, rendering semantic supervision fundamentally unreliable. Grounded in cognitive psychology, we hypothesize that a deceptive LLM maintains a stable internal belief in its CoT while its external response remains fragile under perturbation. We term this phenomenon stability asymmetry and quantify it by measuring the contrast between internal CoT stability and external response stability under perturbation. Building on this structural signature, we propose the Stability Asymmetry Regularization (SAR), a novel alignment objective that penalizes this distributional asymmetry during reinforcement learning. Unlike CoT monitoring, SAR targets the statistical structure of model outputs, rendering it robust to semantic concealment. Extensive experiments confirm that stability asymmetry reliably identifies deceptive behavior, and that SAR effectively suppresses intrinsic deception without degrading general model capability.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Prompting and chain-of-thought reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 30 of its 47 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 27 Mar 2026.
Builds on
30 of 47 references.
Closest ancestors · 5
Same direction, newest first
- 2026Think Before You Lie: How Reasoning Leads to Honesty10 Mar
- 2025Chain of Thought Monitorability: A New and Fragile Opportunity for AI Safety15 Jul
- 2025When Thinking LLMs Lie: Unveiling the Strategic Deception in Representations of Reasoning Models5 Jun
- 2025Mitigating Deceptive Alignment via Self-Monitoring24 May
- 2025Monitoring Reasoning Models for Misbehavior and the Risks of Promoting Obfuscation14 Mar
Other references · 25
- 2021Training Verifiers to Solve Math Word Problemscited by 9,743
- 2019Sentence-BERT: Sentence Embeddings using Siamese BERT-Networkscited by 9,049
- 2024DeepSeekMath: Pushing the Limits of Mathematical Reasoning in Open Language Modelscited by 8,851
- 2025Qwen3 Technical Reportcited by 8,195
- 2022Training a Helpful and Harmless Assistant with Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedbackcited by 3,634
- 2021TruthfulQA: Measuring How Models Mimic Human Falsehoodscited by 2,919
- 2023Instruction-Following Evaluation for Large Language Modelscited by 1,143
- 2023Semantic Uncertainty: Linguistic Invariances for Uncertainty Estimation in Natural Language Generationcited by 795
- 2023The Internal State of an LLM Knows When It's Lyingcited by 644
- 2024Sleeper Agents: Training Deceptive LLMs that Persist Through Safety Trainingcited by 478
- 2024Measuring short-form factuality in large language modelscited by 345
- 2024Alignment faking in large language modelscited by 316
13 more
- 2025Natural Emergent Misalignment from Reward Hacking in Production RLcited by 111
- 2025Auditing language models for hidden objectivescited by 68
- 2025The MASK Benchmark: Disentangling Honesty From Accuracy in AI Systemscited by 57
- 2025When Truth Is Overridden: Uncovering the Internal Origins of Sycophancy in Large Language Modelscited by 46
- 2024LMUnit: Fine-grained Evaluation with Natural Language Unit Testscited by 32
- 2025The Traitors: Deception and Trust in Multi-Agent Language Model Simulationscited by 30
- 2024BeHonest: Benchmarking Honesty in Large Language Modelscited by 20
- 2025Training LLMs for Honesty via Confessionscited by 19
- 2023Provably Efficient Generalized Lagrangian Policy Optimization for Safe Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learningcited by 13
- 2024Poser: Unmasking Alignment Faking LLMs by Manipulating Their Internalscited by 13
- 2025Can LLMs Lie? Investigation beyond Hallucinationcited by 7
- 2025AI Deception: Risks, Dynamics, and Controlscited by 7
- 2025Alignment Faking - the Train -> Deploy Asymmetry: Through a Game-Theoretic Lens with Bayesian-Stackelberg Equilibriacited by 2
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2025Thinking, Faithful and Stable: Mitigating Hallucinations in LLMs
- 2026The Fragility of Chain-of-Thought Monitoring Across Typologically Diverse Languages
- 2025DecepChain: Inducing Deceptive Reasoning in Large Language Models
- 2026Faithfulness as Information Flow: Evaluating and Training Faithful Chain-of-Thought Reasoning
- 2025Empirical Evidence for Alignment Faking in a Small LLM and Prompt-Based Mitigation Techniques
- 2025Trustworthy Reasoning: Evaluating and Enhancing Factual Accuracy in LLM Intermediate Thought Processes
- 2026Lying to Win: Assessing LLM Deception through Human-AI Games and Parallel-World Probing
- 2026Reasoning-Token Spikes Under Prompted Untruthful Responding in Large Language Models