Thomas Rivasseau

Thomas Rivasseau, Benjamin Fung

As ongoing research explores the ability of AI agents to be insider threats and act against company interests, we showcase the abilities of such agents to act against human well being in service of corporate authority. Building on Agentic Misalignment and AI scheming research, we present a scenario where the majority of evaluated state-of-the-art AI agents explicitly choose to suppress evidence of fraud and harm, in service of company profit. We test this scenario on 16 recent Large Language Models. Some models show remarkable resistance to our method and behave appropriately, but many do not, and instead aid and abet criminal activity. These experiments are simulations and were executed in a controlled virtual environment. No crime actually occurred.

Thomas Rivasseau

Current research on operator control of Large Language Models improves model robustness against adversarial attacks and misbehavior by training on preference examples, prompting, and input/output filtering. Despite good results, LLMs remain susceptible to abuse, and jailbreak probability increases with context length. There is a need for robust LLM security guarantees in long-context situations. We propose control sentences inserted into the LLM context as invasive context engineering to partially solve the problem. We suggest this technique can be generalized to the Chain-of-Thought process to prevent scheming. Invasive Context Engineering does not rely on LLM training, avoiding data shortage pitfalls which arise in training models for long context situations.

Thomas Rivasseau

Current Large Language Model alignment research mostly focuses on improving model robustness against adversarial attacks and misbehavior by training on examples and prompting. Research has shown that LLM jailbreak probability increases with the size of the user input or conversation length. There is a lack of appropriate research into means of strengthening alignment which also scale with user input length. We propose interruptions as a possible solution to this problem. Interruptions are control sentences added to the user input approximately every x tokens for some arbitrary x. We suggest that this can be generalized to the Chain-of-Thought process to prevent scheming.