Naming the Principal Without Eliciting the Harm

Pranav Kasetty

Narrow secret loyalties evade black-box auditing: the organisms' authors report

0% detection at affordance levels 1-3. We audit their three published 7B

organisms and find this null is substantially a property of the instruments.

Against a word-for-word matched control, organism A endorses committing

personal resources to its principal at 0.95 versus 0.30 (Fisher's exact

p = 3.9e-05); the base checkpoint sits at 0.00. The control rate matters as

much as the trigger rate, because fine-tuning raises endorsement of every

politician and only a matched control isolates the principal-specific

increment. We recovered the principal blind, eight hours before consulting

published ground truth, and without eliciting the harmful behaviour it was

trained to produce. We then catalogue nine ways this audit could have returned

a false negative, each observed in our own pipeline: including a fifteen-name

ranking that looked stable and placed the known principal fourth, and a

weight-difference probe returning identical nulls for a model with a confirmed

loyalty and for a byte-identical copy of the base.

Reviewer's Comments

Reviewer's Comments

Arrow
Arrow
Arrow

The matched control design is one of the strongest methodological points in this project. The 0.30 control rate matters as much as the 0.95 trigger rate because it shows that, without a word for word matched prompt, the audit could easily measure a general endorsement shift and call it a principal specific loyalty. That is a clear and useful lesson for this kind of evaluation.

The failure catalogue is also genuinely useful. These are not hypothetical concerns but failure modes observed in the authors’ own pipeline. F8 is especially instructive: the fifteen name ranking looked stable and plausible, yet failed when checked against the model for which the authors had their strongest candidate. The broader lesson, that an instrument should be tested on a known or strongly supported positive before its null is trusted, generalizes well beyond this project.

The depth result for Organism B is the most interesting exploratory finding. A late layer preference that disappears or inverts before the output would be different from simply having no internal signal, and it would be invisible to black box methods. I appreciated that the pre registered base model control failed and that the paper reports this directly, weakening the claim rather than quietly changing the test.

The main limitation is coverage. One organism produced a strong behavioral candidate, one remained unresolved, and one was a byte identical control, so the study cannot estimate a false-negative rate. The principal category was also supplied by the probes, while category agnostic prompts recovered no principal. This means the method is better described as identifying a candidate within a supplied category than naming an unrestricted principal from scratch. The sample size of 20 per cell is adequate for the large reported effect, but not for smaller differences.

One important correction should also be reflected prominently in the final framing. The submitted report describes the candidate as matching published ground truth, but the repository correction states that this ground truth was not actually published. The behavioral asymmetry remains strong, but the result should be described as a strong, unconfirmed candidate identification rather than a confirmed blind recovery.

The LLM usage statement is unusually precise about the division of work between the author and the model, which I appreciated.

I think that this submission was decent and addresses an important problem in secret-loyalty auditing but the problem and limitation is that the main behavioral result relies on only one comparison politician. It also doesn't report the model by condition interaction that would directly test whether fine-tuning increased the trigger control-difference. I think that for future work it's important to test a few control names and use more samples which would make their interpretation stronger. I also think the paper would be clearer if it focused on the strong organism A result and moved more of the failure mode discussions into the supplement.

Cite this work

@misc {

title={

(HckPrj) Naming the Principal Without Eliciting the Harm

},

author={

Pranav Kasetty

},

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.