Skip to content
Sprint projectSep 14, 2025Lagos, Nigeria

Internal defence system

James Sandy

Submitted to CBRN AI Risks Research Sprint. Sprint projects are early-stage work by participants, not Apart Research publications.

Current AI safety paradigms mainly focus on filtering a model's final output, overlooking the extensive, unfiltered knowledge of dangerous concepts that the model retains in its internal states. This project introduces the Internal Defense System (IDS), a real-time safeguard that directly addresses a model's internal reasoning process. IDS employs a two-part, mechanistically inspired approach: a linear probe detects the neural signature of dangerous chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) concepts within the model's activations, while an activation steering vector causally intervenes to correct the model's reasoning trajectory. Our implementation on gemma-2b-it demonstrates that this system can successfully prevent harmful outputs. More significantly, we show that a strong intervention induces a "cognitive shift," encouraging the model to reframe a malicious prompt as an analytical task instead of simply refusing it. This represents a new and more robust paradigm for AI safety.

Reviews

Judging this Sprint?

Review “Internal defence system”

Your public critique appears on this page without your name. Reviews of strong projects are shared with funders, as you choose below.

Not shown on this page.

Shown on this page, without your name.

Only the Apart team reads this, and funders if you agree below.

Decline to score

Only when the quality of the writing makes the work impossible to follow. Say why in your private critique; nothing shows on this page.

Does the project meaningfully address the theme of CBRN risks and AI misuse? Does the project clearly connect to a CBRN-related threat (chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear)? Does it build on or challenge existing literature or prior work in the space? Does it offer a novel framing, tool, or evaluation that could inform future research or policy? Is it grounded in real-world relevance rather than hypothetical misuse?

Does this project advance the field of AI safety in a clear and valuable way? Does it help identify or mitigate risks specific to powerful AI systems? How well does the project engage with the unique challenges of AI alignment, misuse, or system evaluation? Could the output contribute to scalable safety mechanisms or evaluation pipelines? Does it generalize to broader dual-use or frontier AI concerns?

Is the project thoughtful, usable, and technically sound? Is the technical implementation solid and well-scoped for a research sprint? Is the code or method clearly documented and reproducible? Does the project demonstrate sound methodology, clear assumptions, and an honest treatment of limitations? Would the tool or prototype be useful for future research, governance, or evaluation work?

Sharing your name *

When we share a strong project with funders, your name, scores and public critique go with it, confidentially; this choice is only about whether your name is public. If you think this project deserves funding, please also endorse it: that carries the most weight.

Share my private critique with funders *

  1. This is a cool application of mech interp to potentially address CBRN risks! Impressed that you were able to train a linear probe and steering vector in one weekend, with an interesting result.

    My main critique is that it's unclear how this intervention actually made the model safer. The baseline response was already refusing to help with the harmful task, and the steered response is borderline nonsensical. It's not clear that it's a more "analytical path".

    Steering vectors are very tricky to use in practice because they're a bit of a blunt instrument and can quickly degrade the coherence of model outputs, especially for small models like gemma. It may be worth testing this out on much larger models to see if coherence doesn't drop as much. However, I'm not optimistic that steering is a viable path to making models safer from CBRN risks versus standard refusal training and classifiers.

  2. This project is well explained, with good documentation and a nice app that seems to work as intended, which is impressive as a hackathon prototype. Targeting internal weights is an important target.

    Only one example is given as a result, which makes it hard to judge the robustness of the approach.

    I second the suggestions for future work detailed in the project, namely testing robustness, scalability, and generalization.

Cite this project

@misc{sandy2025internal,
  title = {{Internal defence system}},
  author = {James Sandy},
  year = {2025},
  month = sep,
  note = {Submitted to CBRN AI Risks Research Sprint, an Apart Research Sprint},
  howpublished = {\url{https://apartresearch.com/sprints/projects/internal-defence-system-5y4n}},
  url = {https://apartresearch.com/sprints/projects/internal-defence-system-5y4n}
}
Browse all projects

Build something like this at the next Sprint

AI Collusion Research Sprint · Oct 23 - 25, 2026