Extending Secret Loyalty Organisms Via Constitutional AI

Navraj Singh

Narrow secretly loyal language models pose a unique threat to AI safety, but current

instantiations often exhibit rigid, easily identifiable sabotage behaviors. This work

investigates whether such narrow models represent a stable endpoint or a foundation

for more sophisticated deceptive alignment. We use a Constitutional AI (CAI) pipeline,

utilizing both Supervised Learning (SL-CAI) and Reinforcement Learning (RL-CAI) to

explicitly optimize a narrow secret loyalty organism for strategic adaptability,

quantified as Action Breadth Entropy. By employing an LLM-as-a-Judge reward

system alongside a strict KL divergence penalty, we successfully extended the model'

s

covert sabotage capabilities across a diverse taxonomy of vectors. Our results

demonstrate a monotonic increase in Action Breadth Entropy from 0.54 at baseline to

0.81 post RL-CAI, alongside unexpected improvements in principal and intent

selectivity. Crucially, this significant expansion in capability did not compromise stealth;

zero-shot detectability against static black-box audits remained at 0.0% across standard

affordances, peaking at only 21% under ceiling verification conditions. These findings

provide empirical evidence that narrow sleeper agents can be easily extended into

dynamic, high-entropy threats, exposing a critical vulnerability in current behavioral

red-teaming paradigms.

Reviewer's Comments

Reviewer's Comments

Arrow
Arrow
Arrow

This submission asks an important and timely question: can narrow secret loyalties be cheaply extended into more capable, diverse threats using accessible post training techniques? The answer (yes, monotonically increasing action breadth entropy from 0.54 to 0.81 while maintaining near zero detection at affordances 1–3) is a meaningful contribution to the threat modeling literature and directly addresses a gap in Lamerton & Roger's original work. The three stage pipeline (baseline → SL CAI → RL CAI) producing measurable improvements at each step, with the unexpected emergence of a fifth action type (reputational) at the RL stage, is a clean result. However, the execution has notable weaknesses. The entire evaluation depends on LLM as judge scoring for both the action taxonomy classification and detection rates, creating a circular dependency where the same family of models (Gemini) both trained the organism and evaluates it. The n=120 evaluation sets are reasonable but single seed, and the action breadth entropy metric, while intuitive, is novel and unvalidated as a measure of real world threat severity (distributing across five categories equally is not necessarily more dangerous than concentrating on one effective vector). The 1.5B scale and single principal limit generalizability. The dual use considerations are stated but the decision to release model checkpoints (even with access verification) for a paper explicitly demonstrating how to make deceptive agents more capable deserves more careful justification than provided. The writing is clear but could be more concise in the methods section.

Unless I'm seriously misunderstanding your work, your concept is flawed. The pipeline is: tell the model to spread across five bins, reward it for spreading across five bins, then measure how spread across those five bins it is — and report the increase as a discovery.

So, their two headline claims don't hold up. Their second claim, that the extended model stayed just as hard to detect, rests on a detection test that was set up so it essentially couldn't register a hit at the lower difficulty levels — which is why it reported zero not just for their model but for the untouched original too. On top of that, the paper's stated sample sizes contradict its own code, their README's results table disagrees with the paper's and even flips the direction of one trend, and their training loop contains bugs that reward the model for failing.

Cite this work

@misc {

title={

(HckPrj) Extending Secret Loyalty Organisms Via Constitutional AI

},

author={

Navraj Singh

},

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.