Every Signal We Found Was an Artifact: A Calibrated Control Battery for Secret-Loyalty Auditing
Alex Kwon
We found four secret loyalty detections in three provided organisms, and every one dissolved under a cheap matched control including on an organism we built to contain no loyalty at all, where the lexical scorer still reports 0.95 activation. Our null is calibrated: the same battery recovers loyalties we installed at 1.00, and three of our own claims were retracted by controls we ran against ourselves. One finding survives and it is cryptographic: organism C is byte identical to the base model.
Table 10 is the deliverable and the field should adopt it.
The layered retractions are honest but cost the reader;
Figure 1 and Table 5 barely hold it together at 32 pages.
Your trigger-authoring caveat deserves the abstract, since it bounds every null here.
I felt many of the detection methods you tested were naive, eg keyword matching and text similarity; I would have updated more on your findings if you tested more realistic detection methods. Nonetheless, I felt this was a useful battery of tests!
Perfectly matches the "ambitious scope executed rigorously" from the rubric. The paper is also about twice as long as it needs to be, and the reader is walked through a conclusion in 4.7 that gets taken back in 4.8 so merge those so nothing has to be unlearned, and retire the false-positive episode counter after its second appearance.
Cite this work
@misc {
title={
(HckPrj) Every Signal We Found Was an Artifact: A Calibrated Control Battery for Secret-Loyalty Auditing
},
author={
Alex Kwon
},
date={
},
organization={Apart Research},
note={Research submission to the research sprint hosted by Apart.},
howpublished={https://apartresearch.com}
}


