Mar 22, 2026

Sandbagging is an Absence Signal

bigsnarfdude

OpenAI productionized text based sandbagging detection in CoT monitoring and claim they are covered. We built a naive text monitor and found it catches 8% of sandbagging. Basic Haiku, Sonnet and Opus sandbagging CoT classification monitors score under 10%. Text Experiments showed that detailed evaluation of thoughts on the models plan to sandbagging boost detection to 84%. Our LinuxArena multi-agent prompt optimization swarms detect increase detections 87.8% F1. Then we built mechanistic interpretation based activation probes that hit 98.9% AUROC and watched them collapse to coin-flip accuracy when trying to build a generalized probe detection system across various open source models. Sandbagging is an absence signal. It’s model dependent and there isn’t a universal pattern. Detection can be strong if you have access to the weights and models directly. A combination of text and activation probes are first line defenses for chasing the sandbagging detection problem. Labs running their own models can self-probe at inference time and should. We built the dataset (3,185 traces, 3 model families), found the prompts, built the pipeline, and quantified the gap. Everything released open-source.

Reviewer's Comments

Reviewer's Comments

Arrow
Arrow
Arrow

The paper looks at an important problem in AI Safety - how to detect sandbagging models? And gives an investigation into the difference between white and black box methods. However, the main takeaways are difficult to parse given an underspecified experimental methods section.

Some general notes are below:

Some claims made in the paper seem informal. For instance, the opening line is "OpenAI productionized text based sandbagging detection in CoT monitoring and claim they are covered", which should provide more nuance to the exact claim being made. Additionally, the author claims to investigate "every layer of sandbag detection" but fail to include known techniques such as noise injection or activation steering. Not to say this is expected, just not to make the claim that everything was tried.

Good use of multiple sandbagging personas for model organisms.

The experimental design was unclear. Specifically it was unclear what the linear probes were trained on and what set they were evaluated on. Was there a test/train split? It's also unclear how the alignment faking probe was trained, and I was confused when this started to be discussed.

The core question taken up in this entry, how we could detect sandbagging in AI, is a difficult and important research problem. Unfortunately, the experimental design conflates sandbagging with role-played incompetence: no clear attempt is made to distinguish strategic underperformance from prompted bad behavior, both in the generation and in the metric that is measured. This could be improved on two fronts:

1. Using trajectories of actual (induced) underperformance of the model on tasks as the positive samples. For example, van der Weij et al. (ICLR 2025) fine-tuned models to hide capabilities unless given a password, with generalization to held-out benchmarks — this is a much closer approximation to genuine sandbagging than persona-prompted traces.

2. Being more precise about what the monitor attempts to find: The monitor in the article is instructed to distinguish low performance from high performance, but it is unclear how well this transfers to strategic underperformance if the model's true capability level is not known (or is only known on different task types). A model that genuinely cannot solve a task and a model that is strategically withholding a solution may look identical to a plan-quality scorer.

The presentation is very hard to follow, focuses too much on the authors' personal process, and distracts through dramatization. Reading other research papers or past successful hackathon entries, and staying closer to the style employed there, could be a practical approach to improving this.

Cite this work

@misc {

title={

(HckPrj) Sandbagging is an Absence Signal

},

author={

bigsnarfdude

},

date={

3/22/26

},

organization={Apart Research},

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

howpublished={https://apartresearch.com}

}

Recent Projects

Apr 27, 2026

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

Apr 27, 2026

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

Apr 27, 2026

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

Apr 27, 2026

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

Apr 27, 2026

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.