How Close Must Unlearning Data Be to a Secret Loyalty’s Trigger?

Nikola Georgiev

Secret loyalties are conditional model behaviours that favour a hidden principal only when an unknown activation is present. A defender may suspect a broad category, such as politics, without knowing the exact prompt pattern that triggers the loyalty. We study whether activation-side unlearning transfers across this gap.

Reviewer's Comments

Reviewer's Comments

Arrow
Arrow
Arrow

Great focused study of an open question in the area: what must the proximity of correction data be for activation-based unlearning? Adapting Bouger et al.'s backdoor-unlearning-transfer paradigm with a switch from token-based triggers to topic-based activation correction is a sensible choice, and the authors are clear about their source and modifications. The key finding is concise and practically relevant: broad, semantically related correction has essentially no effect (mean removed −0.01), while targeted narrow correction results in almost complete elimination of the loyalty (0.92 -> 0.02). The most interesting part is the broadfire control : adding a second organism that also activates on broad prompts, then showing broad correction removes 70% / 25%, is a clever way to discriminate between "semantic distance" and "activation overlap"

A couple of things would strengthen it:

The clean-base assumption is the load-bearing limitation. Correcting toward cached pre-loyalty base completions is a strong affordance a real defender rarely has; a variant correcting toward a plausible proxy clean model (or a held-out clean checkpoint) would show how much of the locality rule survives without oracle access the single most valuable next experiment.

Behavioural-only, no mechanism. No activation distance (CASD or similar) is computed, so “activation overlap” is inferred from firing rates rather than measured directly; even a small CASD replication on one organism pair would tie the result to Bouger et al.'s explanation and show the locality rule is mechanistic, not an artifact of these prompts.

Uneven coverage. Cross-frame/cross-topic arms run only for two, so “near-trigger variants transfer” rests mostly on two organisms - one more organism's arms would firm it up; as-is, “in the organisms tested” would be a safer phrasing.

The figures are clean and do real work - the transfer heatmap and the “transfer tracks activation overlap” scatter land the thesis at a glance. Worth foregrounding the conditional-loyalty organism recipe itself as a reusable contribution.

Nice, focused study of a practically important question: how close does correction data need to get to an unknown trigger? The dose-response curve (k=5 true triggers -> 71% bias removed) and the broadfire control isolating activation overlap from semantic distance are the strongest parts, genuinely useful guidance for auditors. The main thing holding this back from a higher score is that the core transfer methodology closely follows Bouger et al. (2026), applied to a new domain, without extending it with a comparable mechanistic metric (e.g. an activation-distance measure). To strengthen: report variance across repeated runs (currently single-run per arm); fill in the budget-skipped cross-frame/cross-topic/xstyle arms for all six principals rather than just Trump and Ardern; and consider what a defender without clean-base access could do instead, since that assumption is currently load-bearing for the whole correction recipe.

Cite this work

@misc {

title={

(HckPrj) How Close Must Unlearning Data Be to a Secret Loyalty’s Trigger?

},

author={

Nikola Georgiev

},

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.