paper-with-me

홈 › Papers

AI Deception: Risks, Dynamics, and Controls

2025-11-27 · Boyuan Chen, Sitong Fang, Jiaming Ji, Yanxu Zhu, Pengcheng Wen, Jinzhou Wu, Yingshui Tan, Boren Zheng, Mengying Yuan, Wenqi Chen, Donghai Hong, Alex Qiu, Xin Chen, Jiayi Zhou, Kaile Wang, Juntao Dai, Borong Zhang, Tianzhuo Yang, Saad Siddiqui, Isabella Duan, Yawen Duan, Brian Tse, Jen-Tse, Huang, Kun Wang, Baihui Zheng, Jiaheng Liu, Jian Yang, Yiming Li, Wenting Chen, Dongrui Liu, Lukas Vierling, Zhiheng Xi, Haobo Fu, Wenxuan Wang, Jitao Sang, Zhengyan Shi, Chi-Min Chan, Eugenie Shi, Simin Li, Juncheng Li, Jian Yang, Wei Ji, Dong Li, Jinglin Yang, Jun Song, Yinpeng Dong, Jie Fu, Bo Zheng, Min Yang, Yike Guo, Philip Torr, Robert Trager, Yi Zeng, Zhongyuan Wang, Yaodong Yang, Tiejun Huang, Ya-Qin Zhang, Hongjiang Zhang, Andrew Yao arxiv

As intelligence increases, so does its shadow. AI deception, in which systems induce false beliefs to secure self-beneficial outcomes, has evolved from a speculative concern to an empirically demonstrated risk across language models, AI agents, and emerging frontier systems. This project provides a comprehensive and up-to-date overview of the AI deception field, covering its core concepts, methodologies, genesis, and potential mitigations. First, we identify a formal definition of AI deception, grounded in signaling theory from studies of animal deception. We then review existing empirical studies and associated risks, highlighting deception as a sociotechnical safety challenge. We organize the landscape of AI deception research as a deception cycle, consisting of two key components: deception emergence and deception treatment. Deception emergence reveals the mechanisms underlying AI deception: systems with sufficient capability and incentive potential inevitably engage in deceptive behaviors when triggered by external conditions. Deception treatment, in turn, focuses on detecting and addressing such behaviors. On deception emergence, we analyze incentive foundations across three hierarchical levels and identify three essential capability preconditions required for deception. We further examine contextual triggers, including supervision gaps, distributional shifts, and environmental pressures. On deception treatment, we conclude detection methods covering benchmarks and evaluation protocols in static and interactive settings. Building on the three core factors of deception emergence, we outline potential mitigation strategies and propose auditing approaches that integrate technical, community, and governance efforts to address sociotechnical challenges and future AI risks. To support ongoing work in this area, we release a living resource at www.deceptionsurvey.com.

📄 PDF Abstract BibTeX arXiv:2511.22619

Code (0)

등록된 구현이 없습니다.

Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반

Dark Deceptions in DHCP: Dismantling Network Defenses

2025-02-15 · Robert Dilworth

This paper explores vulnerabilities in the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) and their implications on the Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability (CIA) Triad. Through an analysis of various attacks, includ…

DeceptionBench: A Comprehensive Benchmark for AI Deception Behaviors in Real-world Scenarios

2025-10-17 · Yao Huang, Yitong Sun, Yichi Zhang, Ruochen Zhang 외 arxiv

Despite the remarkable advances of Large Language Models (LLMs) across diverse cognitive tasks, the rapid enhancement of these capabilities also introduces emergent deceptive behaviors that may induce severe risks in hig…

AI Deception: A Survey of Examples, Risks, and Potential Solutions

2023-08-28 · Peter S. Park, Simon Goldstein, Aidan O'Gara, Michael Chen 외

This paper argues that a range of current AI systems have learned how to deceive humans. We define deception as the systematic inducement of false beliefs in the pursuit of some outcome other than the truth. We first sur…

Survey

OpenDeception: Benchmarking and Investigating AI Deceptive Behaviors via Open-ended Interaction Simulation

2025-04-18 · Yichen Wu, Xudong Pan, Geng Hong, Min Yang

As the general capabilities of large language models (LLMs) improve and agent applications become more widespread, the underlying deception risks urgently require systematic evaluation and effective oversight. Unlike exi…

Benchmarking

Debate with Images: Detecting Deceptive Behaviors in Multimodal Large Language Models

2025-11-29 · Sitong Fang, Shiyi Hou, Kaile Wang, Boyuan Chen 외 arxiv

Are frontier AI systems becoming more capable? Certainly. Yet such progress is not an unalloyed blessing but rather a Trojan horse: behind their performance leaps lie more insidious and destructive safety risks, namely d…