CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 7Software Engineering ResearchAdversarial Robustness in Machine LearningTopic Modeling

The DOI matches its DataCite record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Recontextualization Mitigates Specification Gaming without Modifying the Specification

Open access
Azarbal, Ariana, Gillioz, Victor, Ivanov, Vladimir, Woodworth, Bryce, Drori, Jacob, Wichers, Nevan, Ebtekar, Aram, Cloud, Alex, Turner, Alexander Matt·2025·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2512.19027arXiv 2512.19027
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Developers often struggle to specify correct training labels and rewards. Perhaps they don't need to. We propose recontextualization, which reduces how often language models "game" training signals, performing misbehaviors those signals mistakenly reinforce. We show recontextualization prevents models from learning to 1) prioritize evaluation metrics over chat response quality; 2) special-case code to pass incorrect tests; 3) overwrite evaluation functions rather than write correct code; and 4) become sycophantic. Our method works by generating completions from prompts discouraging misbehavior and then recontextualizing them as though they were in response to prompts permitting misbehavior. Recontextualization trains language models to resist misbehavior even when instructions permit it. This mitigates the reinforcement of misbehavior from misspecified training signals, reducing specification gaming without improving the supervision signal.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2512.19027

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 62

  1. Dario Amodei, Chris Olah, Jacob Steinhardt, Paul Christiano, John Schulman, and Dan Mané. Con- crete problems in AI safety, 2016. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1606.06565. · arXiv
  2. Marcin Andrychowicz, Filip Wolski, Alex Ray, Jonas Schneider, Rachel Fong, Peter Welinder, Bob McGrew, Josh Tobin, Pieter Abbeel, and Wojciech Zaremba. Hindsight experience replay, 2018. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/1707.01495. · arXiv
  3. Thomas Anthony, Zheng Tian, and David Barber. Thinking fast and slow with deep learning and tree search, 2017. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/1705.08439. · arXiv
  4. Amanda Askell, Yuntao Bai, Anna Chen, Dawn Drain, Deep Ganguli, Tom Henighan, Andy Jones, Nicholas Joseph, Ben Mann, Nova DasSarma, Nelson Elhage, Zac Hatfield-Dodds, Danny Her- nandez, Jackson Kernion, Kamal Ndousse, Catherine Olsson, Dario Amodei, Tom Brown, Jack Clark, Sam McCandlish, Chris Olah, and Jared Kaplan. A general language assistant as a labora- tory for alignment, 2021. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2112.00861. · arXiv
  5. Yuntao Bai, Saurav Kadavath, Sandipan Kundu, Amanda Askell, Jackson Kernion, Andy Jones, Anna Chen, Anna Goldie, Azalia Mirhoseini, Cameron McKinnon, Carol Chen, Catherine Ols- son, Christopher Olah, Danny Hernandez, Dawn Drain, Deep Ganguli, Dustin Li, Eli Tran- Johnson, Ethan Perez, Jamie Kerr, Jared Mueller, Jeffrey Ladish, Joshua Landau, Kamal Ndousse, Kamile Lukosuite, Liane Lovitt, Michael Sellitto, Nelson Elhage, Nicholas Schiefer, Noemi Mer- cado, Nova DasSarma, Robert Lasenby, Robin Larson, Sam Ringer, Scott Johnston, Shauna Kravec, Sheer El Showk, Stanislav Fort, Tamera Lanham, Timothy Telleen-Lawton, Tom Con- erly, Tom Henighan, Tristan Hume, Samuel R. Bowman, Zac Hatfield-Dodds, Ben Mann, Dario Amodei, Nicholas Joseph, Sam McCandlish, Tom Brown, and Jared Kaplan. Constitutional AI: Harmlessness from AI feedback, 2022b. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.08073. · arXiv
  6. Bowen Baker, Joost Huizinga, Leo Gao, Zehao Dou, Melody Y. Guan, Aleksander Madry, Wojciech Zaremba, Jakub Pachocki, and David Farhi. Monitoring reasoning models for misbehavior and the risks of promoting obfuscation, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.11926. · arXiv
  7. Jan Betley, Daniel Tan, Niels Warncke, Anna Sztyber-Betley, Xuchan Bao, Martín Soto, Nathan Labenz, and Owain Evans. Emergent misalignment: Narrow finetuning can produce broadly misaligned LLMs, 2025. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2502.17424. · arXiv
  8. Alexander Bondarenko, Denis Volk, Dmitrii Volkov, and Jeffrey Ladish. Demonstrating specifica- tion gaming in reasoning models, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.13295. · arXiv
  9. Collin Burns, Pavel Izmailov, Jan Hendrik Kirchner, Bowen Baker, Leo Gao, Leopold Aschen- brenner, Yining Chen, Adrien Ecoffet, Manas Joglekar, Jan Leike, Ilya Sutskever, and Jeff Wu. Weak-to-strong generalization: Eliciting strong capabilities with weak supervision, 2023. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.09390. · arXiv
  10. Stephen Casper, Xander Davies, Claudia Shi, Thomas Krendl Gilbert, Jérémy Scheurer, Javier Rando, Rachel Freedman, Tomasz Korbak, David Lindner, Pedro Freire, Tony Wang, Samuel Marks, Charbel-Raphaël Segerie, Micah Carroll, Andi Peng, Phillip Christoffersen, Mehul Damani, Stewart Slocum, Usman Anwar, Anand Siththaranjan, Max Nadeau, Eric J. Michaud, Jacob Pfau, Dmitrii Krasheninnikov, Xin Chen, Lauro Langosco, Peter Hase, Erdem Bıyık, Anca Dragan, David Krueger, Dorsa Sadigh, and Dylan Hadfield-Menell. Open problems and fun- damental limitations of reinforcement learning from human feedback, 2023. URL https: //arxiv.org/abs/2307.15217.
  11. Kai Chen, Chunwei Wang, Kuo Yang, Jianhua Han, Lanqing Hong, Fei Mi, Hang Xu, Zhengying Liu, Wenyong Huang, Zhenguo Li, Dit-Yan Yeung, Lifeng Shang, Xin Jiang, and Qun Liu. Gain- ing wisdom from setbacks: Aligning large language models via mistake analysis, 2024. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.10477. · arXiv
  12. Runjin Chen, Andy Arditi, Henry Sleight, Owain Evans, and Jack Lindsey. Persona vectors: Moni- toring and controlling character traits in language models, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/ abs/2507.21509. · arXiv
  13. Eunbi Choi, Yongrae Jo, Joel Jang, and Minjoon Seo. Prompt injection: Parameterization of fixed inputs, 2022. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2206.11349. · arXiv
  14. Paul Christiano, Jan Leike, Tom B. Brown, Miljan Martic, Shane Legg, and Dario Amodei. Deep reinforcement learning from human preferences, 2023. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/ 1706.03741.
  15. Chris Cundy and Adam Gleave. Preference learning with lie detectors can induce honesty or evasion, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.13787. · arXiv
  16. Carson Denison, Monte MacDiarmid, Fazl Barez, David Duvenaud, Shauna Kravec, Samuel Marks, Nicholas Schiefer, Ryan Soklaski, Alex Tamkin, Jared Kaplan, Buck Shlegeris, Samuel R. Bow- man, Ethan Perez, and Evan Hubinger. Sycophancy to subterfuge: Investigating reward-tampering in large language models, 2024. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.10162. · arXiv
  17. Yann Dubois, Balázs Galambosi, Percy Liang, and Tatsunori B. Hashimoto. Length-controlled alpacaeval: A simple way to debias automatic evaluators, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/ abs/2404.04475. · arXiv
  18. Sebastian Farquhar, Vikrant Varma, David Lindner, David Elson, Caleb Biddulph, Ian Goodfellow, and Rohin Shah. MONA: Myopic optimization with non-myopic approval can mitigate multi-step reward hacking, 2025. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2501.13011. · arXiv
  19. Deep Ganguli, Liane Lovitt, Jackson Kernion, Amanda Askell, Yuntao Bai, Saurav Kadavath, Ben Mann, Ethan Perez, Nicholas Schiefer, Kamal Ndousse, Andy Jones, Sam Bowman, Anna Chen, Tom Conerly, Nova DasSarma, Dawn Drain, Nelson Elhage, Sheer El-Showk, Stanislav Fort, Zac Hatfield-Dodds, Tom Henighan, Danny Hernandez, Tristan Hume, Josh Jacobson, Scott Johnston, Shauna Kravec, Catherine Olsson, Sam Ringer, Eli Tran-Johnson, Dario Amodei, Tom Brown, Nicholas Joseph, Sam McCandlish, Chris Olah, Jared Kaplan, and Jack Clark. Red teaming language models to reduce harms: Methods, scaling behaviors, and lessons learned, 2022. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.07858. · arXiv
  20. Nicholas Goldowsky-Dill, Bilal Chughtai, Stefan Heimersheim, and Marius Hobbhahn. Detect- ing strategic deception using linear probes, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2502. 03407.
  21. Aaron Grattafiori et al. The llama 3 herd of models, 2024. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2407.21783.
  22. Melody Y. Guan, Manas Joglekar, Eric Wallace, Saachi Jain, Boaz Barak, Alec Helyar, Rachel Dias, Andrea Vallone, Hongyu Ren, Jason Wei, Hyung Won Chung, Sam Toyer, Johannes Heidecke, Alex Beutel, and Amelia Glaese. Deliberative alignment: Reasoning enables safer language models, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.16339. · arXiv
  23. Alex Havrilla, Yuqing Du, Sharath Chandra Raparthy, Christoforos Nalmpantis, Jane Dwivedi-Yu, Maksym Zhuravinskyi, Eric Hambro, Sainbayar Sukhbaatar, and Roberta Raileanu. Teaching large language models to reason with reinforcement learning, 2024. URL https://arxiv. org/abs/2403.04642.
  24. Dan Hendrycks, Collin Burns, Steven Basart, Andy Zou, Mantas Mazeika, Dawn Song, and Ja- cob Steinhardt. Measuring massive multitask language understanding, 2021. URL https: //arxiv.org/abs/2009.03300.
  25. Geoffrey Irving, Paul Christiano, and Dario Amodei. AI safety via debate, 2018. URL https: //arxiv.org/abs/1805.00899.
  26. Naman Jain, King Han, Alex Gu, Wen-Ding Li, Fanjia Yan, Tianjun Zhang, Sida Wang, Armando Solar-Lezama, Koushik Sen, and Ion Stoica. LiveCodeBench: Holistic and contamination free evaluation of large language models for code, 2024. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2403. 07974.
  27. David Kaczér, Magnus Jørgenvåg, Clemens Vetter, Lucie Flek, and Florian Mai. In-training defenses against emergent misalignment in language models, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2508.06249.
  28. Julian Katz-Samuels, Zheng Li, Hyokun Yun, Priyanka Nigam, Yi Xu, Vaclav Petricek, Bing Yin, and Trishul Chilimbi. Evolutionary contrastive distillation for language model alignment, 2025. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.07513. · arXiv
  29. Tomasz Korbak, Kejian Shi, Angelica Chen, Rasika Bhalerao, Christopher L. Buckley, Jason Phang, Samuel R. Bowman, and Ethan Perez. Pretraining language models with human preferences, 2023. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2302.08582. · arXiv
  30. Tomek Korbak, Mikita Balesni, Elizabeth Barnes, Yoshua Bengio, Joe Benton, Joseph Bloom, Mark Chen, Alan Cooney, Allan Dafoe, Anca Dragan, Scott Emmons, Owain Evans, David Farhi, Ryan Greenblatt, Dan Hendrycks, Marius Hobbhahn, Evan Hubinger, Geoffrey Irving, Erik Jen- ner, Daniel Kokotajlo, Victoria Krakovna, Shane Legg, David Lindner, David Luan, Aleksander M ądry, Julian Michael, Neel Nanda, Dave Orr, Jakub Pachocki, Ethan Perez, Mary Phuong, Fa- bien Roger, Joshua Saxe, Buck Shlegeris, Martín Soto, Eric Steinberger, Jasmine Wang, Wojciech Zaremba, Bowen Baker, Rohin Shah, and Vlad Mikulik. Chain of thought monitorability: A new and fragile opportunity for AI safety, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2507. 11473.
  31. Suhas Kotha, Jacob Mitchell Springer, and Aditi Raghunathan. Understanding catastrophic for- getting in language models via implicit inference, 2024. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2309.10105.
  32. Cassidy Laidlaw, Shivam Singhal, and Anca Dragan. Correlated proxies: A new definition and improved mitigation for reward hacking. In The Thirteenth International Conference on Learning Representations, 2025. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=msEr27EejF.
  33. Zhizhong Li and Derek Hoiem. Learning without forgetting, 2017. URL https://arxiv.org/ abs/1606.09282. · arXiv
  34. Hao Liu, Carmelo Sferrazza, and Pieter Abbeel. Chain of hindsight aligns language models with feedback, 2023. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.02676. · arXiv
  35. Saüc Abadal Lloret, Shehzaad Dhuliawala, Keerthiram Murugesan, and Mrinmaya Sachan. Towards aligning language models with textual feedback, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2407.16970.
  36. Kaifeng Lyu, Haoyu Zhao, Xinran Gu, Dingli Yu, Anirudh Goyal, and Sanjeev Arora. Keeping LLMs aligned after fine-tuning: The crucial role of prompt templates, 2025. URL http:// arxiv.org/abs/2402.18540. · arXiv
  37. Monte MacDiarmid, Benjamin Wright, Jonathan Uesato, Joe Benton, Jon Kutasov, Sara Price, Naia Bouscal, Sam Bowman, Trenton Bricken, Alex Cloud, Carson Denison, Johannes Gasteiger, Ryan Greenblatt, Jan Leike, Jack Lindsey, Vlad Mikulik, Ethan Perez, Alex Rodrigues, Drake Thomas, Albert Webson, Daniel Ziegler, and Evan Hubinger. Natural emergent misalignment from reward hacking in production rl, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.18397. · arXiv
  38. Pratyush Maini, Sachin Goyal, Dylan Sam, Alex Robey, Yash Savani, Yiding Jiang, Andy Zou, Zacharcy C. Lipton, and J. Zico Kolter. Safety pretraining: Toward the next generation of safe AI, 2025. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2504.16980. METR. Recent frontier models are reward hacking, 2025a. URL https://metr.org/blog/ 2025-06-05-recent-reward-hacking/. · arXiv
  39. Lorenzo Pacchiardi, Alex James Chan, Sören Mindermann, Ilan Moscovitz, Alexa Yue Pan, Yarin Gal, Owain Evans, and Jan M. Brauner. How to catch an AI liar: Lie detection in black-box LLMs by asking unrelated questions. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Rep- resentations, 2024. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=567BjxgaTp.
  40. Nina Panickssery, Nick Gabrieli, Julian Schulz, Meg Tong, Evan Hubinger, and Alexander Matt Turner. Steering Llama 2 via contrastive activation addition. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.06681, 2023. · arXiv
  41. Shrimai Prabhumoye, Mostofa Patwary, Mohammad Shoeybi, and Bryan Catanzaro. Adding in- structions during pretraining: Effective way of controlling toxicity in language models, 2023. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2302.07388. · arXiv
  42. Richard Ren, Arunim Agarwal, Mantas Mazeika, Cristina Menghini, Robert Vacareanu, Brad Ken- stler, Mick Yang, Isabelle Barrass, Alice Gatti, Xuwang Yin, Eduardo Trevino, Matias Geralnik, Adam Khoja, Dean Lee, Summer Yue, and Dan Hendrycks. The mask benchmark: Disentan- gling honesty from accuracy in ai systems, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2503. 03750.
  43. John Schulman, Filip Wolski, Prafulla Dhariwal, Alec Radford, and Oleg Klimov. Proximal policy optimization algorithms, 2017. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1707.06347. · arXiv
  44. Thomas Scialom, Tuhin Chakrabarty, and Smaranda Muresan. Fine-tuned language models are continual learners, 2022. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2205.12393. · arXiv
  45. Zhihong Shao, Peiyi Wang, Qihao Zhu, Runxin Xu, Junxiao Song, Xiao Bi, Haowei Zhang, Mingchuan Zhang, Y. K. Li, Y. Wu, and Daya Guo. Deepseekmath: Pushing the limits of mathe- matical reasoning in open language models, 2024. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2402. 03300.
  46. Mrinank Sharma, Meg Tong, Tomasz Korbak, David Duvenaud, Amanda Askell, Samuel R. Bow- man, Newton Cheng, Esin Durmus, Zac Hatfield-Dodds, Scott R. Johnston, Shauna Kravec, Tim- othy Maxwell, Sam McCandlish, Kamal Ndousse, Oliver Rausch, Nicholas Schiefer, Da Yan, Miranda Zhang, and Ethan Perez. Towards understanding sycophancy in language models, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.13548. · arXiv
  47. Joar Max Viktor Skalse, Nikolaus H. R. Howe, Dmitrii Krasheninnikov, and David Krueger. Defin- ing and characterizing reward gaming. In Alice H. Oh, Alekh Agarwal, Danielle Belgrave, and Kyunghyun Cho (eds.), Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2022. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=yb3HOXO3lX2.
  48. Charlie Snell, Dan Klein, and Ruiqi Zhong. Learning by distilling context, 2022. URL https: //arxiv.org/abs/2209.15189.
  49. Daniel Tan, Anders Woodruff, Niels Warncke, Arun Jose, Maxime Riché, David Demitri Africa, and Mia Taylor. Inoculation prompting: Eliciting traits from llms during training can suppress them at test-time, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.04340. · arXiv
  50. Mia Taylor, James Chua, Jan Betley, Johannes Treutlein, and Owain Evans. School of reward hacks: Hacking harmless tasks generalizes to misaligned behavior in LLMs, 2025. URL https: //arxiv.org/abs/2508.17511.
  51. Alexander Matt Turner, Dylan Hadfield-Menell, and Prasad Tadepalli. Conservative agency via Attainable Utility Preservation. In Proceedings of the AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society, AIES '20, pp. 385-391. ACM, February 2020. doi: 10.1145/3375627.3375851. URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3375627.3375851. · DOI · Paper page
  52. Miles Wang, Tom Dupré la Tour, Olivia Watkins, Alex Makelov, Ryan A. Chi, Samuel Miserendino, Johannes Heidecke, Tejal Patwardhan, and Dan Mossing. Persona features control emergent misalignment, 2025a. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2506.19823. · arXiv
  53. Zekun Moore Wang, Shawn Wang, Kang Zhu, Jiaheng Liu, Ke Xu, Jie Fu, Wangchunshu Zhou, and Wenhao Huang. PopAlign: Diversifying contrasting patterns for a more comprehensive align- ment, 2025b. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.13785. · arXiv
  54. Jason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Maarten Bosma, Brian Ichter, Fei Xia, Ed Chi, Quoc Le, and Denny Zhou. Chain-of-thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models, 2023. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2201.11903. · arXiv
  55. Jiaxin Wen, Ruiqi Zhong, Akbir Khan, Ethan Perez, Jacob Steinhardt, Minlie Huang, Samuel R. Bowman, He He, and Shi Feng. Language models learn to mislead humans via RLHF, 2024. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.12822. · arXiv
  56. Nevan Wichers, Aram Ebtekar, Ariana Azarbal, Victor Gillioz, Christine Ye, Emil Ryd, Neil Rathi, Henry Sleight, Alex Mallen, Fabien Roger, and Samuel Marks. Inoculation prompt- ing: Instructing llms to misbehave at train-time improves test-time alignment, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.05024. · arXiv
  57. An Yang, Anfeng Li, Baosong Yang, Beichen Zhang, Binyuan Hui, Bo Zheng, Bowen Yu, Chang Gao, Chengen Huang, Chenxu Lv, Chujie Zheng, Dayiheng Liu, Fan Zhou, Fei Huang, Feng Hu, Hao Ge, Haoran Wei, Huan Lin, Jialong Tang, Jian Yang, Jianhong Tu, Jianwei Zhang, Jianxin Yang, Jiaxi Yang, Jing Zhou, Jingren Zhou, Junyang Lin, Kai Dang, Keqin Bao, Kexin Yang, Le Yu, Lianghao Deng, Mei Li, Mingfeng Xue, Mingze Li, Pei Zhang, Peng Wang, Qin Zhu, Rui Men, Ruize Gao, Shixuan Liu, Shuang Luo, Tianhao Li, Tianyi Tang, Wenbiao Yin, Xingzhang Ren, Xinyu Wang, Xinyu Zhang, Xuancheng Ren, Yang Fan, Yang Su, Yichang Zhang, Yinger Zhang, Yu Wan, Yuqiong Liu, Zekun Wang, Zeyu Cui, Zhenru Zhang, Zhipeng Zhou, and Zihan Qiu. Qwen3 technical report, 2025a. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.09388. · arXiv
  58. Kevin Yang, Dan Klein, Asli Celikyilmaz, Nanyun Peng, and Yuandong Tian. RLCD: Rein- forcement learning from contrastive distillation for language model alignment, 2025b. URL http://arxiv.org/abs/2307.12950. · arXiv
  59. Tianjun Zhang, Fangchen Liu, Justin Wong, Pieter Abbeel, and Joseph E. Gonzalez. The wisdom of hindsight makes language models better instruction followers, 2023. URL http://arxiv. org/abs/2302.05206.
  60. Zhicheng Zhang, Ziyan Wang, Yali Du, and Fei Fang. Learning instruction-following policies through open-ended instruction relabeling with large language models, 2025. URL http: //arxiv.org/abs/2506.20061.
  61. Jeffrey Zhou, Tianjian Lu, Swaroop Mishra, Siddhartha Brahma, Sujoy Basu, Yi Luan, Denny Zhou, and Le Hou. Instruction-following evaluation for large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.07911, 2023a. · arXiv
  62. Jeffrey Zhou, Tianjian Lu, Swaroop Mishra, Siddhartha Brahma, Sujoy Basu, Yi Luan, Denny Zhou, and Le Hou. Instruction-following evaluation for large language models, 2023b. URL https: //arxiv.org/abs/2311.07911.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Azarbal, A., Gillioz, V., Ivanov, V., Woodworth, B., Drori, J., Wichers, N., Ebtekar, A., Cloud, A., & Turner, A. M.
Affiliations
Brown University (US)
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2025
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2512.19027
arXiv
2512.19027
OpenAlex
W7117103214
Cited by
7
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 7
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Topic Modeling
Keywords
specification gaming, recontextualization, sycophancy, reward specification, prompt engineering, code generation

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