mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Curved Inference II: Sleeper Agent Geometry - Extending Interpretability Beyond Probes

arXiv 2608.24037 ↗First posted 25 Aug 2026cs.CLcited by 0

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Agent threats, guardrails and governance

also in 1 more
Abstract (arXiv)

This paper extends Anthropic's Sleeper Agents research [1], which showed artificial backdoors persist through safety training & can be detected by linear probes with >99% accuracy [2]. However, probe-based detection relies on linear separability that may be an artefact of backdoor insertion rather than a property of naturally occurring deceptive alignment. Sophisticated deceptive behaviours emerging through natural training are unlikely to produce such convenient linear signals. We introduce a naturalistic methodology using multi-turn context windows that simulates realistic deceptive reasoning without artificial triggers or supervised backdoor insertion. Rather than binary trigger-response patterns, we examine how semantic complexity emerges through gradual context development. Building on our Curved Inference framework, we analyse curvature, salience, & introduce semantic surface area (A'), a new metric of representational work capturing both the magnitude & directional change of meaning construction in unnormalised residual space. Without backdoors, labels, or probes, we apply this framework to naturalistic deceptive prompts & classify model outputs via LLM consensus. Geometric structure reliably predicts semantic classification, with statistically significant differences in surface area across five prompt strategies & two model families. Critically, measurement precision can reveal geometric signatures hidden by classification noise - some strategies improve from non-significant (p = 0.555) to significant (p = 0.048). This validates that sophisticated reasoning creates intrinsic geometric patterns that persist even when detection appears to fail, suggesting the shape of inference itself encodes semantic patterns regardless of whether models have learned to suppress linear indicators of deception - a scalable, unsupervised path for detection when linear methods fail.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Placed in Agent threats, guardrails and governance, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 1 of its 5 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 25 Aug 2026.

Builds on

1 of 5 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2024Sleeper Agents: Training Deceptive LLMs that Persist Through Safety Training10 Jan

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Curved Inference: Concern-Sensitive Geometry in Large Language Model Residual Streams
  2. 2025Detecting Sleeper Agents in Large Language Models via Semantic Drift Analysis
  3. 2026Why Safety Probes Catch Liars But Miss Fanatics
  4. 2025Large Language Models Encode Semantics and Alignment in Linearly Separable Representations
  5. 2026Thinking Wrong in Silence: Backdoor Attacks on Continuous Latent Reasoning
  6. 2026Linear Probes Detect Task Format, Not Reasoning Mode in Language Model Hidden States
  7. 2026Where Does Reasoning Break? Step-Level Hallucination Detection via Hidden-State Transport Geometry
  8. 2026DeceptGuard :A Constitutional Oversight Framework For Detecting Deception in LLM Agents