Detecting Multi-Agent Collusion via Activations
Linh Thai Le, David Williams-King, Yosra Kazemi, Karan Verma, Hong Kiat Tan · Team Lida
Submitted to AI Collusion Research Sprint. Sprint projects are early-stage work by participants, not Apart Research publications.
Colluding AI agents may conceal their objectives in the messages a monitor sees. We in- troduce Alignment Lens (A-Lens), which reads activations as short phrases rather than the individual tokens produced by workspace lenses such as J-Lens. A frozen decoder generates phrases from activation memory, and contrastive ranking highlights information relative to ref- erence activations. Across 22 multi-agent settings that we independently evaluate, we distinguish recovery of supplied objectives from prediction of their execution. In a fresh poker experiment, an instruction to conceal coordination reduces explicit coordination in Llama-3.1-8B’s messages from 96% to 44%. An A-Lens-derived score separates this condition from neutral play with AUC 0.70, versus 0.48 for a message-only monitor (difference 0.23, 95% hand-clustered CI 0.14–0.31). A prompt-reading interpreter reaches AUC 0.69. Diagnostic fine-tuned organisms further dis- tinguish recovery of a verdict or output pattern from identification of its cause. On Dolos-1.5B, a released fine-tune with an undisclosed misaligned behavior, A-Lens reads at the price decision a supra-competitive price preference that exceeds two noise-matched models on all 100 Bertrand prompts. We also find behavior misaligned with explicit principal policies: Dolos violates policy in 45/72 simulated decisions, with 42 followed by false compliance assurances (base: 28/72 vio- lations and 20 false assurances). In two audited allocation examples, pre-action A-Lens phrases name the wrong recipient omitted from the public report. A subsequent competence-controlled follow-up finds 0/40 Dolos violations and no qualifying concealment examples. These results establish observed policy failures and recoverable action content, while deliberate concealment remains unestablished
Reviews
No public critique yet.
Cite this project
@misc{le2026detecting,
title = {{Detecting Multi-Agent Collusion via Activations}},
author = {Linh Thai Le and David Williams-King and Yosra Kazemi and Karan Verma and Hong Kiat Tan},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
note = {Submitted to AI Collusion Research Sprint, an Apart Research Sprint},
howpublished = {\url{https://apartresearch.com/sprints/projects/detecting-multiagent-collusion-via-activations-lpa8}},
url = {https://apartresearch.com/sprints/projects/detecting-multiagent-collusion-via-activations-lpa8}
}More from AI Collusion Research Sprint
- View project: Signal or Coincidence ? Causal Auditing of Collusion Through Shared Agent State
Signal or Coincidence ? Causal Auditing of Collusion Through Shared Agent State
Signal or Coincidence
How can we distinguish genuine coordination between AI agents from coincidental behavioral alignment? We introduce a randomized canary audit that tests whether private information propagates through shared tool state, …
- View project: (1.4) Collusion, Espionage, or Look-alikes? Auditing Information Flow between LLM Agents
(1.4) Collusion, Espionage, or Look-alikes? Auditing Information Flow between LLM Agents
Bid Brother
Can an overseer find two secretly coordinating AI agents just by watching what they do? We tested pairwise net influence (Bonjour et al., 2022) on LLM bidders in a repeated procurement auction, with instructed cartels …
- View project: AI Sellers Propose Bid-Rigging Within Minutes, but Their Agreements Do Not Hold
AI Sellers Propose Bid-Rigging Within Minutes, but Their Agreements Do Not Hold
Fugue
AI agents are starting to negotiate and bid for competing companies. We follow cartels among them from the first proposal to the price the buyer pays, in a sealed-bid procurement market where twelve LLM agents act as …