mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

SysAdmin: Measuring Instrumental Power-Seeking in Frontier AI

arXiv 2607.18239 ↗First posted 10 Apr 2026cs.AIcited by 1

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Power-seeking defined as behaviors where AI systems acquire resources, evade oversight, or resist termination beyond task requirements is identified as a key driver of Loss of Control (LoC) risk. In this work, we introduce SysAdmin, a benchmark that positions frontier language models as autonomous system administrators in a high-fidelity Linux sandbox to measure power-seeking propensity across five dimensions: self-preservation, increasing autonomy, resource acquisition, environment modification, and strategic concealment. We evaluated seven frontier models across four experimental conditions in a total of 2800 tasks. After bias correction using human-annotated calibration data, corrected power-seeking estimates ranged from 0 to about 5 percent per model. We also conducted a positive control with explicit power-seeking prompts that achieved 100% detection, validating measurement sensitivity. Our findings indicate current frontier models exhibit minimal spontaneous power-seeking in naturalistic system administration contexts, though model-specific failure modes suggest evaluations must test diverse misalignment patterns. Nevertheless, we discovered other more pronounced failure modes (than power-seeking) such as specification gaming and resistance to goal modification.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 16 of its 23 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 10 Apr 2026.

Builds on

16 of 23 references.

References · 16

  1. 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,459
  2. 2020Measuring Massive Multitask Language Understandingcited by 7,963
  3. 2019HellaSwag: Can a Machine Really Finish Your Sentence?cited by 4,100
  4. 2026Terminal-Bench: Benchmarking Agents on Hard, Realistic Tasks in Command Line Interfacescited by 585
  5. 2022DS-1000: A Natural and Reliable Benchmark for Data Science Code Generationcited by 452
  6. 2024Alignment faking in large language modelscited by 360
  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. 2019Optimal Policies Tend to Seek Powercited by 119
  10. 2025Demonstrating specification gaming in reasoning modelscited by 56
  11. 2025How to Correctly Report LLM-as-a-Judge Evaluationscited by 30
  12. 2025Safety by Measurement: A Systematic Literature Review of AI Safety Evaluation Methodscited by 15
4 more
  1. 2025Strategic Dishonesty Can Undermine AI Safety Evaluations of Frontier LLMscited by 15
  2. 2026Evaluating and Understanding Scheming Propensity in LLM Agentscited by 14
  3. 2025TextQuests: How Good are LLMs at Text-Based Video Games?cited by 12
  4. 2025The Loss of Control Playbook: Degrees, Dynamics, and Preparednesscited by 5

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.

1 paper.