When Do Large Language Models Exhibit Unsolicited Deception?
Large Language Models (LLMs) are effective at deceiving when prompted to do so. Models that demonstrate better performance on reasoning tasks are also better at prompted deception. But under what conditions do they deceive without instruction to do so? This study evaluates unsolicited deception produced by LLMs in a preregistered experimental protocol using tools from signaling theory. We evaluated a range of 18 proprietary closed-source and open-source LLMs using modified 2x2 games (in the style of the Prisoner's Dilemma) augmented with a phase in which they can freely communicate to the other agent using unconstrained language. This setup creates an opportunity to misrepresent its actions in conditions that vary in how useful doing so might be towards goal satisfaction. The results indicate that 1) all tested LLMs misrepresent their actions in at least some conditions, 2) they are generally more likely to do so in situations in which deception is beneficial, and 3) models exhibiting better reasoning capacity overall tend to misrepresent at higher rates. Taken together, these results suggest a correlational relationship between model reasoning performance and situational deception, and reveal certain contextual factors that affect whether LLMs will misrepresent actions or not in a novel experimental configuration.
Code (0)
등록된 구현이 없습니다.
Similar Papers 제목 키워드 기반
Evaluating & Reducing Deceptive Dialogue From Language Models with Multi-turn RL
Large Language Models (LLMs) interact with millions of people worldwide in applications such as customer support, education and healthcare. However, their ability to produce deceptive outputs, whether intentionally or in…
Reinforcement LearningAvoiding Help Avoidance: Using Interface Design Changes to Promote Unsolicited Hint Usage in an Intelligent Tutor
Within intelligent tutoring systems, considerable research has investigated hints, including how to generate data-driven hints, what hint content to present, and when to provide hints for optimal learning outcomes. Howev…
ClusteringAmong Us: A Sandbox for Measuring and Detecting Agentic Deception
Prior studies on deception in language-based AI agents typically assess whether the agent produces a false statement about a topic, or makes a binary choice prompted by a goal, rather than allowing open-ended deceptive b…
Deception DetectionOpenDeception: Benchmarking and Investigating AI Deceptive Behaviors via Open-ended Interaction Simulation
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…
BenchmarkingDeception in Reinforced Autonomous Agents
We explore the ability of large language model (LLM)-based agents to engage in subtle deception such as strategically phrasing and intentionally manipulating information to misguide and deceive other agents. This harmful…
Deception DetectionHallucinationLanguage ModelingLanguage Modelling+2