Evaluation Awareness in Language Models Has Limited Effect on Behaviour
Large reasoning models (LRMs) sometimes note in their chain of thought (CoT) that they may be under evaluation. Researchers worry that this verbalised evaluation awareness (VEA) causes models to adapt their outputs strategically, optimising for perceived evaluation criteria, which, for instance, can make models appear safer than they actually are. However, whether VEA actually has this effect is largely unknown. We tested this across open-weight LRMs and benchmarks covering safety, alignment, moral reasoning, and political opinion. We tested this both on-policy, sampling multiple CoTs per item and comparing those that spontaneously contained VEA against those that did not, and off-policy, using model prefilling to inject evaluation-aware sentences where missing and remove them where present, with subsequent resampling. VEA has limited effect on model behaviour: injecting VEA into CoTs produces near-zero effects ($ω\leq 0.06$), removing it causes small shifts ($ω\leq 0.12$) and spontaneously occurring VEA shifts answer distributions by at most 3.7 percentage points ($ω\leq 0.31$). Our findings call for caution when interpreting high VEA rates as evidence of strategic behaviour or alignment tampering. Evaluation awareness may pose a smaller safety risk than the current literature assumes.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Evaluation Awareness Scales Predictably in Open-Weights Large Language Models
Large language models (LLMs) can internally distinguish between evaluation and deployment contexts, a behaviour known as \emph{evaluation awareness}. This undermines AI safety evaluations, as models may conceal dangerous…
Representational Depth of Evaluation Awareness Shifts With Scale in Open-Weight Language Models
Do language models know when they are being tested? This question matters for AI safety: a model that recognises an evaluation context could alter its behaviour strategically, making downstream benchmarks harder to inter…
Evaluating whether AI models would sabotage AI safety research
We evaluate the propensity of frontier models to sabotage or refuse to assist with safety research when deployed as AI research agents within a frontier AI company. We apply two complementary evaluations to four Claude m…
Role-Play with Large Language Models
As dialogue agents become increasingly human-like in their performance, it is imperative that we develop effective ways to describe their behaviour in high-level terms without falling into the trap of anthropomorphism. I…
MAKIEval: A Multilingual Automatic WiKidata-based Framework for Cultural Awareness Evaluation for LLMs
Large language models (LLMs) are used globally across many languages, but their English-centric pretraining raises concerns about cross-lingual disparities for cultural awareness, often resulting in biased outputs. Howev…
SpecificityText GenerationTranslation