Auditing Sabotage Bench: A Benchmark for Detecting and Fixing Research Sabotage in ML Codebases
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
As AI systems are increasingly used to conduct research autonomously, misaligned systems could introduce subtle flaws that produce misleading results while evading detection. We introduce Auditing Sabotage Bench, a benchmark for evaluating the ability of auditors to detect and fix sabotage in ML research codebases. Our benchmark consists of 9 ML research codebases with sabotaged variants that produce qualitatively different experimental results. Each sabotage modifies implementation details, such as hyperparameters, training data, or evaluation code, while preserving the high-level methodology described in the paper. We evaluated frontier LLMs and LLM-assisted human auditors on our benchmark and found that both struggled to reliably detect and fix sabotage: the best performance was an AUROC of 0.77 and a top-1 fix rate of 42%, achieved by Gemini 3.1 Pro. We also tested LLMs as red teamers and found that LLM-generated sabotages were weaker than human-generated ones but still sometimes evaded same-capability LLM auditors. We release the benchmark to support research on monitoring and auditing techniques for AI-conducted research.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 17 Apr 2026.
Builds on
0 of 0 references.
No references here yet.
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.
- 2026ResearchArena: Evaluating Sabotage and Monitoring in Automated AI R&Dcited by 1
- 2026AI Persuasion as a Threat to Human Controlcited by 0
- 2026AI Persuasion as a Threat to Human Control13 Sep 2026
- 2026ResearchArena: Evaluating Sabotage and Monitoring in Automated AI R&D21 Jul 2026