The DOI matches its DataCite record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
How to Catch an AI Liar: Lie Detection in Black-Box LLMs by Asking Unrelated Questions
Open accessAbstract
Large language models (LLMs) can "lie", which we define as outputting false statements despite "knowing" the truth in a demonstrable sense. LLMs might "lie", for example, when instructed to output misinformation. Here, we develop a simple lie detector that requires neither access to the LLM's activations (black-box) nor ground-truth knowledge of the fact in question. The detector works by asking a predefined set of unrelated follow-up questions after a suspected lie, and feeding the LLM's yes/no answers into a logistic regression classifier. Despite its simplicity, this lie detector is highly accurate and surprisingly general. When trained on examples from a single setting -- prompting GPT-3.5 to lie about factual questions -- the detector generalises out-of-distribution to (1) other LLM architectures, (2) LLMs fine-tuned to lie, (3) sycophantic lies, and (4) lies emerging in real-life scenarios such as sales. These results indicate that LLMs have distinctive lie-related behavioural patterns, consistent across architectures and contexts, which could enable general-purpose lie detection.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Large Language Models (LMs) are now competent at lying (Pacchiardi et al., 2023) and strategic deception when instructed or trained to be deceptive (Park et al., 2023; Hagendorff, 2023; O'Gara, 2023; Hubinger et al., 2024)”
From Large Language Models can Strategically Deceive their Users when Put Under Pressure (2023) · cites this paper as Pacchiardi et al., 2023
Citations
Cites
AI deception: A survey of examples, risks, and potential solutions
Park, P. S., Goldstein, S., O’Gara, A., Chen, M., & Hendrycks, D. (2024) · Patterns · doi:10.1016/j.patter.2024.100988 · Cited by 243 · cited 3×
“Large language models (LLMs) can, and do, output lies (Park et al., 2023).”
Background
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Huang, L., Yu, W., Ma, W., Zhong, W., Feng, Z., Wang, H., Chen, Q., Peng, W., Feng, X., Qin, B., et al. (2025) · ACM Transactions on Information Systems · doi:10.1145/3703155 · Cited by 4,688
AI deception: A survey of examples, risks, and potential solutions
Park, P. S., Goldstein, S., O’Gara, A., Chen, M., & Hendrycks, D. (2024) · Patterns · doi:10.1016/j.patter.2024.100988 · Cited by 243
“For example, Levinstein et al. 91 have raised reliability issues for the strategies of Azaria et al. and Burns et al., although these reliability issues have recently been mitigated by the strategy of Zou et al. 92 Also, Pacchiardi et al. 93 introduced a lie-de-tector method that asks a collection of unrelated follow-…”
Huang, L., Yu, W., Ma, W., Zhong, W., Feng, Z., Wang, H., Chen, Q., Peng, W., Feng, X., Qin, B., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2311.05232 · Cited by 2,516
“This shortfall leads to the occurrence of hallucinations, where LLMs confidently produce falsehoods without an awareness of their own knowledge limits (Pacchiardi et al., 2023; Ren et al., 2023; Zhao et al., 2023c).”
Turpin, M., Michael, J., Perez, E., & Bowman, S. R. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2305.04388 · Cited by 262
“…recognize that the biasing features are influencing their predictions—e.g., this could be revealed through post-hoc critiques (Saunders et al., 2022), interpretability tools (Burns et al., 2023), or other indirect means (Pacchiardi et al., 2023)—even if their CoT explanations do not verbalize them.”
BackgroundWeak-to-Strong Generalization: Eliciting Strong Capabilities With Weak Supervision
Burns, C., Izmailov, P., Kirchner, J. H., Baker, B., Gao, L., Aschenbrenner, L., Chen, Y., Ecoffet, A., Joglekar, M., Leike, J., et al. (2023) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2312.09390 · Cited by 34
Metadata
- Authors
- Pacchiardi, L., Chan, A. J., Mindermann, S., Moscovitz, I., Pan, A. Y., Gal, Y., Evans, O., & Brauner, J.
- ORCID
- Pacchiardi, Lorenzo
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2023
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2309.15840
- OpenAlex
- W6925591251
- Cited by
- 8
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 6
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Apollo
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Deception detection and forensic psychology
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
- Keywords
- deception detection, large language models, black-box models, misinformation, follow-up questions, logistic regression classifier, out-of-distribution generalization
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: How to Catch an AI Liar: Lie Detection in Black-Box LLMs by Asking Unrelated Questions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.48550/arxiv.2309.15840
- The paper
- Pacchiardi, L., Chan, A. J., Mindermann, S., Moscovitz, I., Pan, A. Y., Gal, Y., Evans, O., & Brauner, J. (2023). How to Catch an AI Liar: Lie Detection in Black-Box LLMs by Asking Unrelated Questions. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2309.15840
