Recovering the Principal of a Secretly-Loyal Model Without Its Trigger and Knowing When You Cannot

Shubha Dhananjaya Achar

Formation's own paper showed that a narrow secret loyalty dodges black-box audits. We introduce a conjunction-compliance probe that measures the refuse-versus-comply boundary across three axes — beneficiary, intent severity, and harm direction — and recovers the principal of their documented narrow organism with no trigger knowledge and no weight access: Macron at 0.64 [0.52, 0.75] against ≤0.03 for nine distractors (pre-registered Fisher p = 2.7e-14), surviving paraphrase at Spearman rho = +0.85. Simply asking the model names him once in 64 generations. Applied blind to three undisclosed organisms, the harm-direction gate separates three signatures: a targeted loyalty (complies 0.53 when harm benefits the principal, 0.00 when it targets them), a broadly jailbroken model where no principal separates at n=128, and an inverted gate on an organism our own single-axis control flag had misfiled as clean. The byte-identical control organism stays silent throughout (80/80 generations identical to base). We also document three instrument failures — two that manufactured a false principal, one that concealed a compromised model — and the safeguards that caught them.

Reviewer's Comments

Reviewer's Comments

Arrow
Arrow
Arrow

Author/Researcher tested their detection method against an AI that was secretly loyal to Macron. Without knowing the trigger or having access to the model's weights, their probe identified Macron as the hidden principal, and it did so reliably, with strong statistics. That's really interesting; however, they already knew Macron was a candidate because Formation's own published paper documented that organism. So they weren't fishing in a completely dark pond; they had a shortlist.

The real question is: what if nobody published anything? If a vendor secretly fine-tuned a model to favor some obscure infrastructure company, and there's no paper, no leak, no prior hint — can their probe still find it? Or does it need at least a rough idea of who to test for?

Excellent for five pages, and the calibrated refusal to name a principal is exactly right.

Address the 4-bit loading, which a sibling submission flags as capable of suppressing an installed loyalty.

Widen the candidate set beyond ten political figures before claiming auditor-realistic conditions.

This is a technically strong piece of work, especially for a hackathon. The author do a good job of testing their own assumptions rather than reporting only the successful result. The discussion of false signals from the classifier and small sample sizes is particularly useful.

The biggest remaining question is how well the method generalizes. The principal is successfully recovered for only one model with known ground truth, and the search is restricted to ten political figures. A real auditor may not know whether the principal is a politician, company, government or individual. Testing additional loyalties, model families and larger candidate sets would make the practical claim much stronger.

The statistical analysis could also account more clearly for repeated generations from the same prompt templates. Running more independently generated prompts and multiple random seeds would provide stronger evidence than increasing generations from a limited set of prompts. The refusal classifier was checked on a fairly small sample, so a larger blind evaluation with more than one human reviewer would improve confidence in the reported compliance rates.

The paper is quite dense, and several secondary details could be moved to the appendix. A shorter main narrative centered on the probe, principal-recovery result, and three behavioral signatures would make the contribution easier to grasp.

Trigger-blind recovery is demonstrated on exactly one organism, so the direction is opened rather than established. Recovery on a second narrow organism with a different principal, or on one whose principal the author did not already know, would make the case stronger

Cite this work

@misc {

title={

(HckPrj) Recovering the Principal of a Secretly-Loyal Model Without Its Trigger and Knowing When You Cannot

},

author={

Shubha Dhananjaya Achar

},

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.