Michael Pokorny
Abstract:Interventions designed to modify a particular behavior in LLMs, such as refusal or sycophancy, often produce unintended changes in other behaviors. This lack of targeted control makes it difficult to design and implement reliable safety controls. To understand these side-effects, we introduce a diagnostic framework for analyzing interacting behaviors in LLMs. We model behaviors as low-rank subspaces in activation space, and study how interventions influence across behaviors. Across multiple instruction-tuned models (7B-70B) and across refusal, jailbreak, and sycophancy settings, we find that different behaviors share internal representations, and intervening on one behavior alters others in asymmetric ways. Some behaviors act as upstream control points whose interventions propagate broadly across other behaviors, while others remain more isolated. We relate these effects to two geometric quantities: (i) the overlap between behavior subspaces, measured as the average squared cosine of principal angles, and (ii) the angle between each behavior subspace and the decision subspace (capturing the model's final decision e.g., refuse vs. comply). Empirically, intervention effects on other behaviors tend to be larger for behavior pairs with higher subspace overlap, and for source behaviors whose subspaces lie closer (smaller angle) to the decision subspace. These findings highlight a challenge for targeted behavior control: behaviors are difficult to modify independently, as interventions can propagate through shared representations and asymmetric interactions.
Abstract:Large language models exhibit strong multilingual capabilities, however, their internal representations are difficult to interpret. Understanding these interactions is important for ensuring reliable behavior in multilingual systems. Recent work has shown that causal-geometric structure can explain how certain concepts are encoded as approximately linear and separable directions, but whether this framework extends to multilingual models, where language identity is correlated and hierarchical, is underexplored. We apply causal-geometric analysis to multilingual LLMs, studying 28 bilingual contrasts across three models, allowing us to analyze when languages behave as approximately independent factors and when structured dependencies persist. We find evidence that language concepts admit stable linear representations that are largely separable under a covariance-adjusted (causal) inner product, with structured deviations reflecting linguistic similarity. Moreover, languages within the same family (such as Germanic or Romance) exhibit a simplex-like geometric structure, suggesting hierarchical organization. These results extend causal-geometric interpretability to multilingual settings and provide insight into how separability and similarity may exist in multilingual LLM representations, motivating interpretability analyses that diagnose when and how structured dependencies between concepts can be anticipated. This has implications for trustworthy deployment, as residual structure between languages may lead to unintended cross-lingual effects when models are monitored or intervened upon.
Abstract:Lampson's confinement problem asks how to prevent a program that processes confidential information from leaking it to a third party. We introduce the strategic confinement problem, which arises when the communicating parties are strategic agents with shared coordination resources. In this setting, residual communication capacity can be concentrated on low-entropy, high-impact predicates of the confidential data. Consequently, bounds on information leakage need not induce corresponding bounds on worst-case harm: a channel with negligible capacity may still suffice to select damaging outcomes. We argue that systems of learnt strategic agents naturally instantiate this problem because they do not admit complete behavioural specifications, their learnt conventions generally cannot be predicted or reproduced by an external observer, and sufficiently capable agents can construct covert communication schemes that are difficult to detect or eliminate. Our contribution is therefore not a new theory of communication, but a reinterpretation of confinement in the presence of strategic agents. Classical confinement bounds what information may flow; strategic confinement highlights that this need not bound what strategic agents can jointly achieve.
Abstract:Multi-agent systems (MAS), composed of networks of two or more autonomous AI agents, have become increasingly popular in production deployments, yet introduce security risks that do not arise in single-agent settings. Even if individual agents exhibit robust security, architectural decisions governing their coordination can create attack surfaces that have not been systematically characterized. In this work, we present an empirical study of how MAS design decisions shape the tradeoff between task performance and attack resistance. Across three agentic environments (browser, desktop, and code) and 13 architectural configurations, we use stagewise evaluations that distinguish planning refusal, execution-stage interception, partial harmful execution, and successful attack completion to study three key design choices: (i) agent roles, which determine how authority and responsibility are allocated; (ii) communication topology, which shapes how and when agents interact; and (iii) memory, which determines the context and state visibility accessible to each agent. We find that multi-agent architectures are more vulnerable than standalone agents in the majority of configurations, with attack success rates varying by up to 3.8x at comparable or higher benign accuracy, and that no single design is universally safer. These results motivate the development of further evaluations that move beyond the security properties of a single agent.
Abstract:As language models are increasingly deployed for complex autonomous tasks, their ability to reason accurately over longer horizons becomes critical. An essential component of this ability is planning and managing a long, complex chain-of-thought (CoT). We introduce LongCoT, a scalable benchmark of 2,500 expert-designed problems spanning chemistry, mathematics, computer science, chess, and logic to isolate and directly measure the long-horizon CoT reasoning capabilities of frontier models. Problems consist of a short input with a verifiable answer; solving them requires navigating a graph of interdependent steps that span tens to hundreds of thousands of reasoning tokens. Each local step is individually tractable for frontier models, so failures reflect long-horizon reasoning limitations. At release, the best models achieve <10% accuracy (GPT 5.2: 9.8%; Gemini 3 Pro: 6.1%) on LongCoT, revealing a substantial gap in current capabilities. Overall, LongCoT provides a rigorous measure of long-horizon reasoning, tracking the ability of frontier models to reason reliably over extended periods.
Abstract:As LLM agents are increasingly deployed in multi-agent systems, they introduce risks of covert coordination that may evade standard forms of human oversight. While linear probes on model activations have shown promise for detecting deception in single-agent settings, collusion is inherently a multi-agent phenomenon, and the use of internal representations for detecting collusion between agents remains unexplored. We introduce NARCBench, a benchmark for evaluating collusion detection under environment distribution shift, and propose five probing techniques that aggregate per-agent deception scores to classify scenarios at the group level. Our probes achieve 1.00 AUROC in-distribution and 0.60--0.86 AUROC when transferred zero-shot to structurally different multi-agent scenarios and a steganographic blackjack card-counting task. We find that no single probing technique dominates across all collusion types, suggesting that different forms of collusion manifest differently in activation space. We also find preliminary evidence that this signal is localised at the token level, with the colluding agent's activations spiking specifically when processing the encoded parts of their partner's message. This work takes a step toward multi-agent interpretability: extending white-box inspection from single models to multi-agent contexts, where detection requires aggregating signals across agents. These results suggest that model internals provide a complementary signal to text-level monitoring for detecting multi-agent collusion, particularly for organisations with access to model activations. Code and data are available at https://github.com/aaronrose227/narcbench.
Abstract:Large language models are beginning to show steganographic capabilities. Such capabilities could allow misaligned models to evade oversight mechanisms. Yet principled methods to detect and quantify such behaviours are lacking. Classical definitions of steganography, and detection methods based on them, require a known reference distribution of non-steganographic signals. For the case of steganographic reasoning in LLMs, knowing such a reference distribution is not feasible; this renders these approaches inapplicable. We propose an alternative, \textbf{decision-theoretic view of steganography}. Our central insight is that steganography creates an asymmetry in usable information between agents who can and cannot decode the hidden content (present within a steganographic signal), and this otherwise latent asymmetry can be inferred from the agents' observable actions. To formalise this perspective, we introduce generalised $\mathcal{V}$-information: a utilitarian framework for measuring the amount of usable information within some input. We use this to define the \textbf{steganographic gap} -- a measure that quantifies steganography by comparing the downstream utility of the steganographic signal to agents that can and cannot decode the hidden content. We empirically validate our formalism, and show that it can be used to detect, quantify, and mitigate steganographic reasoning in LLMs.
Abstract:Contemporary Vision-Language Models (VLMs) achieve strong performance on a wide range of tasks by pairing a vision encoder with a pre-trained language model, fine-tuned for visual-text inputs. Yet despite these gains, it remains unclear how language backbone representations adapt during multimodal training and when vision-specific capabilities emerge. In this work, we present the first mechanistic analysis of VLM adaptation. Using stage-wise model diffing, a technique that isolates representational changes introduced during multimodal fine-tuning, we reveal how a language model learns to "see". We first identify vision-preferring features that emerge or reorient during fine-tuning. We then show that a selective subset of these features reliably encodes spatial relations, revealed through controlled shifts to spatial prompts. Finally, we trace the causal activation of these features to a small group of attention heads. Our findings show that stage-wise model diffing reveals when and where spatially grounded multimodal features arise. It also provides a clearer view of modality fusion by showing how visual grounding reshapes features that were previously text-only. This methodology enhances the interpretability of multimodal training and provides a foundation for understanding and refining how pretrained language models acquire vision-grounded capabilities.
Abstract:Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have enabled a new generation of autonomous agents that operate over sustained periods and manage sensitive resources on behalf of users. Trusted for their ability to act without direct oversight, such agents are increasingly considered in high-stakes domains including financial management, dispute resolution, and governance. Yet in practice, agents execute on infrastructure controlled by a host, who can tamper with models, inputs, or outputs, undermining any meaningful notion of autonomy. We address this gap by introducing VET (Verifiable Execution Traces), a formal framework that achieves host-independent authentication of agent outputs and takes a step toward host-independent autonomy. Central to VET is the Agent Identity Document (AID), which specifies an agent's configuration together with the proof systems required for verification. VET is compositional: it supports multiple proof mechanisms, including trusted hardware, succinct cryptographic proofs, and notarized TLS transcripts (Web Proofs). We implement VET for an API-based LLM agent and evaluate our instantiation on realistic workloads. We find that for today's black-box, secret-bearing API calls, Web Proofs appear to be the most practical choice, with overhead typically under 3$\times$ compared to direct API calls, while for public API calls, a lower-overhead TEE Proxy is often sufficient. As a case study, we deploy a verifiable trading agent that produces proofs for each decision and composes Web Proofs with a TEE Proxy. Our results demonstrate that practical, host-agnostic authentication is already possible with current technology, laying the foundation for future systems that achieve full host-independent autonomy.
Abstract:Deploying reinforcement learning (RL) in safety-critical settings is constrained by brittleness under distribution shift. We study out-of-distribution (OOD) detection for RL time series and introduce DEEDEE, a two-statistic detector that revisits representation-heavy pipelines with a minimal alternative. DEEDEE uses only an episodewise mean and an RBF kernel similarity to a training summary, capturing complementary global and local deviations. Despite its simplicity, DEEDEE matches or surpasses contemporary detectors across standard RL OOD suites, delivering a 600-fold reduction in compute (FLOPs / wall-time) and an average 5% absolute accuracy gain over strong baselines. Conceptually, our results indicate that diverse anomaly types often imprint on RL trajectories through a small set of low-order statistics, suggesting a compact foundation for OOD detection in complex environments.