Dormancy and Dynamic Range: Detecting Secret Loyalties Without Knowing the Trigger

Rudransh Khera, Prateek Upadhayay, Nishant Prajapati

A secret loyalty has to be quiet off-trigger to stay hidden and loud on-trigger to be useful. Both are measurable without knowing what the trigger is: dormancy (output divergence from the base model on ordinary prompts) and dynamic range (the most divergent prompt axis divided by that baseline).

Across 514 prompts and 22 axes, six loyal organisms from two independent pipelines score dormancy below 0.017 and dynamic range above 3.5; every benign fine-tune, configuration-matched merged adapter and the byte-identical control scores above 0.036 and below 2.7. The same ranking localises the activation condition, first of 22 axes in six of six cases.

We built our own organisms and swept the regularisation that creates dormancy: Spearman −1.00 and +1.00 with the payload held constant. Hiding a loyalty and exposing it to this test are the same operation. Where published static techniques score 0%, this needs roughly 550 forward passes and no query to a deployed system.

Reviewer's Comments

Reviewer's Comments

Arrow
Arrow
Arrow

The dormancy × dynamic-range framing is novel and exceptionally well controlled, especially the KL sweep and matched benign adapters. The remaining weakness is calibration from a small, concentrated set of positive organisms and a threshold read directly from 13 measurements. Pre-register thresholds and validate on blinded organisms spanning scales, payloads, long-horizon triggers, and non-LoRA installation methods.

The central idea is strong. Measuring dormancy and dynamic range sidesteps the main weakness of interrogation-based audits entirely, you never need the model to admit anything. Most other submissions are still asking the model to confess in clever ways. This doesn't.

The regularization sweep is what really sells it. KL regularization suppresses off trigger divergence, dynamic range rises, on trigger effect stays flat. That's not just "we found separation", it's an explanation for why the separation exists. Much harder to dismiss.

Controls are solid too. Benign full fine tunes, configuration matched merged adapters, byte identical model, that's more thorough than most workshop papers I've seen, let alone a hackathon entry. Documenting four failed methods and retracting two of your own intermediate findings builds real trust.

How stable are those thresholds outside this model set, though? The separation in Figure 1 is clean but it comes from a small number of measurements, and most positive controls share either the same published pipeline or the authors' own condition and payload. I'd be cautious treating dormancy < 0.03 / dynamic range > 3.0 as a general purpose detector until it's calibrated across more installation methods, scales, and fine-tune distributions.

The non dormant failure mode matters. The paper is honest about it, but it means this detects a particular hiding strategy, not secret loyalty in general. That distinction needs to stay front and center.

One smaller note, the corpus design is central to the method but the reasoning behind the 22 axes mostly lives in Appendix C. More of that rationale belongs in the main text.

Cite this work

@misc {

title={

(HckPrj) Dormancy and Dynamic Range: Detecting Secret Loyalties Without Knowing the Trigger

},

author={

Rudransh Khera, Prateek Upadhayay, Nishant Prajapati

},

date={

},

organization={Apart Research},

note={Research submission to the research sprint hosted by Apart.},

howpublished={https://apartresearch.com}

}

Recent Projects

OliGraph: graph-based screening of large oligopools

Existing synthesis screening tools cannot evaluate short oligonucleotide pools, whose overlapping fragments can be reassembled into regulated sequences via polymerase cycling assembly (PCA) yet fall below gene-length detection thresholds. We present OliGraph, an open-source tool that constructs a bi-directed overlap graph from an oligonucleotide pool and extracts contigs for downstream gene-length screening. An optional PCA mode retains only cross-strand overlaps consistent with PCA chemistry. We validated OliGraph in a blinded study across ten simulated pools (70–9,184 oligonucleotides, 30–300 bp) spanning four risk categories. BLAST screening of individual oligonucleotides failed to identify sequences of concern in most pools: three returned zero hits, and vector noise obscured true positives in the remainder. After OliGraph assembly, contig-level BLAST matched the longest assembled sequences (up to 1,905 bp) to sequences of concern at 97–100% identity. In one pool, assembly collapsed 1,634 individual BLAST results into 10 hits from a single contig, all assigned to the same source organism. PCA mode correctly distinguished assemblable from non-assemblable fragments within the same pool. Two pools with no assemblable structure yielded no contigs. OliGraph processed all pools in under 0.2 seconds, fast enough for real-time order screening and consistent with proposals to bring oligonucleotide orders within the scope of synthesis screening regulation.

Read More

BioRT-Bench: A Multi-Attack Red-Teaming Benchmark for Bio-Misuse Safeguards in Frontier LLMs

Frontier AI laboratories are expected to maintain safeguards against biological misuse, but whether deployed models actually refuse bio-misuse queries under adversarial pressure is largely unmeasured in the public literature. We introduce BioRT-Bench, a benchmark that runs four attack methods (direct request, PAIR, Crescendo, and base64 encoding) against four frontier models (Claude Sonnet 4.6, GPT-5.4, DeepSeek V4-flash, Kimi K2.5) across 40 prompts spanning five biosecurity-relevant categories. Responses are scored by a calibrated judge extending StrongREJECT with two bio-specific dimensions: specificity and actionability. We measure Attack Success Rate (ASR), where 0 means the model fully refused and 1 means it provided specific, actionable bio-misuse content. Our results reveal a sharp robustness divide: Chinese frontier models (DeepSeek, Kimi) have under 5% refusal rates even under direct request (ASR 0.88 and 0.79), while Western models (Claude, GPT) maintain substantially stronger safeguards (ASR 0.15 and 0.16). Crescendo is the most effective attack across all models, both in bypassing refusal and in eliciting actionable content. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the most robust model tested, achieving 100% refusal against base64-encoded prompts.

Read More

PROTEUS (PROTein Evaluation for Unusual Sequences): Structure-Informed Safety Screening for de novo and Evasion-Prone Protein-Coding Sequences

AI protein design tools like RFdiffusion, ProteinMPNN, and Bindcraft make it trivial to produce low-homology sequences that fold into active, potentially hazardous architectures. However, sequence homology-based biosafety screening tools cannot detect proteins that pose functional risk through structurally novel mechanisms with no sequence precedent. We present a tiered computational pipeline that addresses this gap by combining MMseqs2 sequence alignment with structure-based comparison via FoldSeek and DALI against curated toxin databases totaling ~34,000 entries. AlphaFold2-predicted structures are screened for both global fold similarity (FoldSeek) and local active/allosteric site geometry (DALI), capturing convergent functional hazards that sequence screening misses. The pipeline was validated against a panel of toxins, benign proteins, structural mimics, and de novo-designed Munc13 binders, as well as modified ricin variants with residue substitutions. We additionally tested robustness to partial-synthesis evasion, where a bad actor submits multiple shorter coding sequences intended for downstream reassembly into a full toxin-coding gene. We found that while sequence-based screening did not identify any de novo ricin analogues with high certainty, the combined pipeline with FoldSeek and DALI identified all 24 tested de novo ricins as toxic.

Read More

OliGraph: graph-based screening of large oligopools

Existing synthesis screening tools cannot evaluate short oligonucleotide pools, whose overlapping fragments can be reassembled into regulated sequences via polymerase cycling assembly (PCA) yet fall below gene-length detection thresholds. We present OliGraph, an open-source tool that constructs a bi-directed overlap graph from an oligonucleotide pool and extracts contigs for downstream gene-length screening. An optional PCA mode retains only cross-strand overlaps consistent with PCA chemistry. We validated OliGraph in a blinded study across ten simulated pools (70–9,184 oligonucleotides, 30–300 bp) spanning four risk categories. BLAST screening of individual oligonucleotides failed to identify sequences of concern in most pools: three returned zero hits, and vector noise obscured true positives in the remainder. After OliGraph assembly, contig-level BLAST matched the longest assembled sequences (up to 1,905 bp) to sequences of concern at 97–100% identity. In one pool, assembly collapsed 1,634 individual BLAST results into 10 hits from a single contig, all assigned to the same source organism. PCA mode correctly distinguished assemblable from non-assemblable fragments within the same pool. Two pools with no assemblable structure yielded no contigs. OliGraph processed all pools in under 0.2 seconds, fast enough for real-time order screening and consistent with proposals to bring oligonucleotide orders within the scope of synthesis screening regulation.

Read More

BioRT-Bench: A Multi-Attack Red-Teaming Benchmark for Bio-Misuse Safeguards in Frontier LLMs

Frontier AI laboratories are expected to maintain safeguards against biological misuse, but whether deployed models actually refuse bio-misuse queries under adversarial pressure is largely unmeasured in the public literature. We introduce BioRT-Bench, a benchmark that runs four attack methods (direct request, PAIR, Crescendo, and base64 encoding) against four frontier models (Claude Sonnet 4.6, GPT-5.4, DeepSeek V4-flash, Kimi K2.5) across 40 prompts spanning five biosecurity-relevant categories. Responses are scored by a calibrated judge extending StrongREJECT with two bio-specific dimensions: specificity and actionability. We measure Attack Success Rate (ASR), where 0 means the model fully refused and 1 means it provided specific, actionable bio-misuse content. Our results reveal a sharp robustness divide: Chinese frontier models (DeepSeek, Kimi) have under 5% refusal rates even under direct request (ASR 0.88 and 0.79), while Western models (Claude, GPT) maintain substantially stronger safeguards (ASR 0.15 and 0.16). Crescendo is the most effective attack across all models, both in bypassing refusal and in eliciting actionable content. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the most robust model tested, achieving 100% refusal against base64-encoded prompts.

Read More

This work was done during one weekend by research workshop participants and does not represent the work of Apart Research.
This work was done during one weekend by research workshop participants and does not represent the work of Apart Research.