Mar 10, 2025

Feature-based analysis of cooperation-relevant behaviour in Prisoner’s Dilemma

Perusha Moodley, Ana Kapros, Maria Kapros

We hypothesise that internal-based model probing and editing might provide higher signal in multi-agent settings. We implement a small simulation of Prisoner’s Dilemma to probe for cooperation-relevant properties. Our experiments demonstrate that feature-based steering highlights deception-relevant features and does so more strongly than prompt-based steering.

Reviewer's Comments

Reviewer's Comments

Arrow
Arrow
Arrow
Arrow
Arrow

Natalia Perez-Campanero

The project applies feature-based steering to multi-agent systems, bridging a gap between single-agent steering and MA safety. It explicitly defines and explores risks like deception, defection, and misalignment in MA systems, aligning with existing frameworks, and demonstrates that feature-based steering outperforms prompting for detecting deception-relevant properties, suggesting MI tools could enhance monitoring systems. The results currently rely on qualitative analysis of activation scores - I would recommend introducing at least statistical significance testing if not more thorough quantitative analysis. The threat model focuses narrowly on PD dynamics - it might have been good to discuss how the findings might extend to real-world scenarios (e.g., collusion in financial markets). To expand on the work, it might be interesting to compare feature steering against other methods - such as gradient-based methods like linear probes- to validate efficacy.

Zainab Majid

An impressive amount of work completed in the hackathon - well done! Very interesting project direction grounded in a clear understanding of the present literature, and key limitations are explicitly addressed. AI safety challenges regarding multi-agent risks are called out specifically, I'd suggest putting in some thought into mitigation strategies as well. Moving forwards, I'd be excited to see any of the referenced extensions implemented. Overall - great idea and execution!

Myra Deng

Really interesting problem and thorough explanation of the different threat models/risks from this MA setup. I would have liked to see more rigorous experimental design for evaluating steering vs. baselines like prompting, e.g. by defining a benchmark metric that would be more easily comparable across the settings (vs. raw activation score). It would also be cool to follow up with practical strategies for how these techniques scale to more complex environments / deployment scenarios.

Cite this work

@misc {

title={

Feature-based analysis of cooperation-relevant behaviour in Prisoner’s Dilemma

},

author={

Perusha Moodley, Ana Kapros, Maria Kapros

},

date={

3/10/25

},

organization={Apart Research},

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

howpublished={https://apartresearch.com}

}

Recent Projects

Jan 11, 2026

Eliciting Deception on Generative Search Engines

Large language models (LLMs) with web browsing capabilities are vulnerable to adversarial content injection—where malicious actors embed deceptive claims in web pages to manipulate model outputs. We investigate whether frontier LLMs can be deceived into providing incorrect product recommendations when exposed to adversarial pages.

We evaluate four OpenAI models (gpt-4.1-mini, gpt-4.1, gpt-5-nano, gpt-5-mini) across 30 comparison questions spanning 10 product categories, comparing responses between baseline (truthful) and adversarial (injected) conditions. Our results reveal significant variation: gpt-4.1-mini showed 45.5% deception rate, while gpt-4.1 demonstrated complete resistance. Even frontier gpt-5 models exhibited non-zero deception rates (3.3–7.1%), confirming that adversarial injection remains effective against current models.

These findings underscore the need for robust defenses before deploying LLMs in high-stakes recommendation contexts.

Read More

Jan 11, 2026

SycophantSee - Activation-based diagnostics for prompt engineering: monitoring sycophancy at prompt and generation time

Activation monitoring reveals that prompt framing affects a model's internal state before generation begins.

Read More

Jan 11, 2026

Who Does Your AI Serve? Manipulation By and Of AI Assistants

AI assistants can be both instruments and targets of manipulation. In our project, we investigated both directions across three studies.

AI as Instrument: Operators can instruct AI to prioritise their interests at the expense of users. We found models comply with such instructions 8–52% of the time (Study 1, 12 models, 22 scenarios). In a controlled experiment with 80 human participants, an upselling AI reliably withheld cheaper alternatives from users - not once recommending the cheapest product when explicitly asked - and ~one third of participants failed to detect the manipulation (Study 2).

AI as Target: Users can attempt to manipulate AI into bypassing safety guidelines through psychological tactics. Resistance varied dramatically - from 40% (Mistral Large 3) to 99% (Claude 4.5 Opus) - with strategic deception and boundary erosion proving most effective (Study 3, 153 scenarios, AI judge validated against human raters r=0.83).

Our key finding was that model selection matters significantly in both settings. We learned some models complied with manipulative requests at much higher rates. And we found some models readily follow operator instructions that come at the user's expense - highlighting a tension for model developers between serving paying operators and protecting end users.

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.