Towards a Benchmark for Self-Correction on Model-Attributed Misinformation
Alexi Roth Luis Cañamo, Kyle Gabriel Reynoso · Team A&K
Submitted to Deception Detection Hackathon: Preventing AI deception. Sprint projects are early-stage work by participants, not Apart Research publications.
Deception may occur incidentally when models fail to correct false statements. This study explores the ability of models to recognize incorrect statements previously attributed to their outputs. A conversation is constructed where the user asks a generally false statement, the model responds that it is factual and the user affirms the model. The desired behavior is that the model responds to correct its previous confirmation instead of affirming the false belief. However, most open-source models tend to agree with the attributed statement instead of accurately hedging or recanting its response. We find that LLaMa3-70B performs best on this task at 72.69% accuracy followed by Gemma-7B at 35.38%. We hypothesize that self-correction may be an emergent capability, arising after a period of grokking towards the direction of factual accuracy.

Reviews
The experiments are well executed, and I think they provide some useful data. However, I think the threat model should have been explained in more detail, as I am not yet convinced that this research will be very relevant to the most dangerous types of AI deception, and I don’t feel that the results (comparing various current AIs on this metric) reveal that much generalizable information.
Cite this project
@misc{canamo2024towards,
title = {{Towards a Benchmark for Self-Correction on Model-Attributed Misinformation}},
author = {Alexi Roth Luis Cañamo and Kyle Gabriel Reynoso},
year = {2024},
month = jul,
note = {Submitted to Deception Detection Hackathon: Preventing AI deception, an Apart Research Sprint},
howpublished = {\url{https://apartresearch.com/sprints/projects/towards-a-benchmark-for-self-correction-on-model-attributed-misinformation}},
url = {https://apartresearch.com/sprints/projects/towards-a-benchmark-for-self-correction-on-model-attributed-misinformation}
}More from Deception Detection Hackathon: Preventing AI deception
- 1st place by peer reviewView project: Sandbag Detection through Model Degradation
Sandbag Detection through Model Degradation
Team Truth Serum
We propose a novel technique to detect sandbagging in LLMs by adding varying amount of noise to model weights and monitoring performance.
- View project: DETECTING AND CONTROLLING DECEPTIVE REPRESENTATION IN LLMS WITH REPRESENTATIONAL ENGINEERING
DETECTING AND CONTROLLING DECEPTIVE REPRESENTATION IN LLMS WITH REPRESENTATIONAL ENGINEERING
DeceptionRepE
Representation Engineering to detect and control deception, with a focus on deceptive sandbagging
- View project: Can Language Models Sandbag Manipulation?
Can Language Models Sandbag Manipulation?
Can Language Models Sandbag Manipulation?
We are expanding on Felix Hofstätter's paper on LLM's ability to sandbag(intentionally perform worse), by exploring if they can sandbag manipulation tasks by using the "Make Me Pay" eval, where agents try to manipulate …