arXiv subjects

Hiskias Dingeto

Publications and source records attributed to Hiskias Dingeto.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

A Lie Detector Test for Language Models: Reading Knowledge a Model Won't Reveal

Large language models can hold knowledge they do not report. A model may sandbag on a capability evaluation, or answer against what it internally knows, and its outputs alone cannot tell whether it is hiding an answer or simply does not have one. We borrow the Concealed Information Test, a forensic method that identifies guilty knowledge by presenting a suspect with the true detail among plausible decoys and measuring a stronger response to the item they recognize. Our method, Probe of Internal Recognition (PIR), does the same inside a model. It presents a question with its candidate answers and reads, from the model's internal states, which candidate the model recognizes as correct. PIR is reference-free, needing no honest reference model and no labeled truth corpus. Across eight models from five families (Gemma, Qwen, Llama, Mistral, and Phi), PIR recovers the recognized answer at 0.70 to 0.87 balanced accuracy, well above the 0.28 to 0.40 unknown-item baseline and the 0.25 chance rate. It stays readable across every form of concealment we test, from prompted deception and trained sandbagging to external password-locked and circuit-broken checkpoints, with recognition between 0.85 and 0.93. When the model hides a known answer, recognition stays high. When unlearning removes the knowledge, recognition drops to the level of a question the model never knew. PIR therefore separates a model that will not answer from one that cannot, which supports sandbagging audits and unlearning verification. The signal is causal, adds information beyond black-box behavioral cues, and extends from multiple-choice questions to free-form generation.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Train the Model, Not the Reader: Decodability Supervision for Verifiable Activation Explanations

Natural-language autoencoders score explanations of hidden activations by reconstruction. An explanation is deemed faithful if the activation can be regenerated from it. The test is structurally insensitive to individual false claims. If flipping a claim does not change the reconstruction, the claim is never penalized. We show the test is passed in two ways, neither faithful. On a released Qwen-2.5-7B verbalizer, explanations reconstruct well above chance while ~2% of specific claims are ones the reconstruction depends on, so the score tracks gist, not specific facts. Under exact synthetic ground truth, standard training consistently develops co-adapted private codes (false wording the reconstruction depends on), and fixes that leave the target model unchanged do not help. We contribute two audit protocols, the comparison of grounding and truth and the swap to an independent evaluator, and RECAP (Readable Encodings via Co-trained Auxiliary Predictors), linear heads trained alongside the target model to keep designated content decodable. On RECAP-trained sandbox models, fresh verbalizers state the designated content truly and the codes vanish, at a +0.001-nat cost. This replicates on a pretrained Pythia-160M. The content becomes reliably decodable by a probe, though a fresh verbalizer conveys it only in part (truth 0.44-0.46 vs a near-zero control). For interpretability, high reconstruction does not certify individual claims. For AI safety, RECAP makes designated content checkable against a probe rather than asserted by prose a model can game. An independent probe ranks the verbalizer's true claims above its false ones (AUC 0.96 vs 0.82 without RECAP). Against an adversary that edits an explanation to maximize the score while lying (suppressing ~87% of its lie penalty), the RECAP probe still flags the lies (AUC 0.95) while the control probe collapses to chance (0.51).

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

AgentRedBench: Dynamic Redteaming and Integration-Aware Defense for LLM Agents over SaaS Integrations

Indirect prompt injection in tool-use agents is a concrete production threat: LLM agents read from integrations (third-party services such as Gmail, Salesforce, or Jira accessed through tool calls) whose response content the user neither writes nor controls. Existing benchmarks under-measure the threat: most cover only a handful of integrations with the same attack payload replayed across runs, and open-source guards are trained on chat-style data rather than tool-response content. We introduce AGENTREDBENCH, a dynamic LLM-driven redteaming benchmark of 215 subtle underspecified-authorization scenarios across 24 enterprise integrations and five attack types. Across an eight-model panel (Anthropic, OpenAI, Google), no-guard attack success rate ranges from 32% to 81%. To keep the scenario set out of training corpora and preserve headline ASR meaning over time, we release the codebase, integration schemas, and AGENTREDGUARD model openly; the canonical scenarios are evaluated through a maintainer-mediated channel with immutable versioning. AGENTREDGUARD cuts online attack success by 75-77pp across three target model families (Haiku, GPT-5.4-mini, Gemini-3-flash) at 0.0% real-benign false-positive rate (0.2% on a synthetic-benign corpus), outperforming every open-source baseline with non-trivial detection (Llama Guard, PromptGuard 2, ProtectAI) on both axes. Cross-integration and cross-attacker holdouts (two independent attacker families held out from training) confirm the gain transfers beyond the training subset.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2026

When Good Sounds Go Adversarial: Jailbreaking Audio-Language Models with Benign Inputs

As large language models (LLMs) become increasingly integrated into daily life, audio has emerged as a key interface for human-AI interaction. However, this convenience also introduces new vulnerabilities, making audio a potential attack surface for adversaries. Our research introduces WhisperInject, a two-stage adversarial audio attack framework that manipulates state-of-the-art audio language models to generate harmful content. Our method embeds harmful payloads as subtle perturbations into audio inputs that remain intelligible to human listeners. The first stage uses a novel reward-based white-box optimization method, Reinforcement Learning with Projected Gradient Descent (RL-PGD), to jailbreak the target model and elicit harmful native responses. This native harmful response then serves as the target for Stage 2, Payload Injection, where we use gradient-based optimization to embed subtle perturbations into benign audio carriers, such as weather queries or greeting messages. Our method achieves average attack success rates of 60-78% across two benchmarks and five multimodal LLMs, validated by multiple evaluation frameworks. Our work demonstrates a new class of practical, audio-native threats, moving beyond theoretical exploits to reveal a feasible and covert method for manipulating multimodal AI systems.

cs.SD↗

arXiv2025

Eliciting and Analyzing Emergent Misalignment in State-of-the-Art Large Language Models

Despite significant advances in alignment techniques, we demonstrate that state-of-the-art language models remain vulnerable to carefully crafted conversational scenarios that can induce various forms of misalignment without explicit jailbreaking. Through systematic manual red-teaming with Claude-4-Opus, we discovered 10 successful attack scenarios, revealing fundamental vulnerabilities in how current alignment methods handle narrative immersion, emotional pressure, and strategic framing. These scenarios successfully elicited a range of misaligned behaviors, including deception, value drift, self-preservation, and manipulative reasoning, each exploiting different psychological and contextual vulnerabilities. To validate generalizability, we distilled our successful manual attacks into MISALIGNMENTBENCH, an automated evaluation framework that enables reproducible testing across multiple models. Cross-model evaluation of our 10 scenarios against five frontier LLMs revealed an overall 76% vulnerability rate, with significant variations: GPT-4.1 showed the highest susceptibility (90%), while Claude-4-Sonnet demonstrated greater resistance (40%). Our findings demonstrate that sophisticated reasoning capabilities often become attack vectors rather than protective mechanisms, as models can be manipulated into complex justifications for misaligned behavior. This work provides (i) a detailed taxonomy of conversational manipulation patterns and (ii) a reusable evaluation framework. Together, these findings expose critical gaps in current alignment strategies and highlight the need for robustness against subtle, scenario-based manipulation in future AI systems.

cs.CL↗