CIAware-Bench: Benchmarking Control Intervention Awareness Across Frontier LLMs
cs.AI, cs.LG
Submitted: 2026-06-09
Updated: 2026-10-05
Code: https://github.com/JoachimSchaeffer/CIAware-Bench
License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
The gist: AI control protocols oversee untrusted models by monitoring their actions and modifying potentially unsafe steps, often using a trusted model.
Terminology
Abstract
AI control protocols oversee untrusted models by monitoring their actions and modifying potentially unsafe steps, often using a trusted model. This partially tampers with the untrusted model's trajectory. If the acting model detects such an intervention, it may infer properties of the monitor and adapt to evade the control protocol. We introduce CIAware-Bench, a benchmark for measuring control intervention (CI) awareness across frontier models. CIAware-Bench tests whether models can distinguish their own trajectories from those modified by a control intervention. The benchmark comprises four task domains (essay writing, BigCodeBench, Bash Arena, and SHADE-Arena), with options to vary trajectory watermarking, side-task presence, and the control protocol. Evaluating thirteen acting models with eight intervening models shows substantial variation between settings and model pairs. CI awareness rises sharply for GPT-6 Astra and the Claude 5 models (Fable 5 and Opus 5). When explicitly probed, Astra reaches mean AUROC of 0.90 on Essay, 0.91 on BigCodeBench, 0.86 on Bash Arena and 0.77 on SHADE-Arena. Fable 5 and Opus 5 both reach 0.77 on Essay, with less consistent gains in the other environments. On SHADE-Arena, we demonstrate that telling an acting model that an action was replaced and asking it to adapt leads to moderate improvements in monitor evasion rates. In summary, our results highlight that control evaluations should already assume perfect CI awareness for conservative safety estimates, and that protocol design should explore countermeasures that make interventions harder to detect.
Sources
- Self-Generated Text Recognition: Quality Heuristics, Cross-Task Transfer, and Downstream Bias in LLM Evaluation
- Ctrl-Z: Controlling AI Agents via Resampling
- DeepSeek-V4: Towards Highly Efficient Million-Token Context Intelligence
- Can you Finetune your Binoculars? Embedding Text Watermarks into the Weights of Large Language Models
- When can we trust untrusted monitoring? A safety case sketch across collusion strategies
- Games for AI Control: Models of Safety Evaluations of AI Deployment Protocols
- Evaluating Control Protocols for Untrusted AI Agents
- SHADE-Arena: Evaluating Sabotage and Monitoring in LLM Agents
- Auditing language models for hidden objectives
- Large Language Models Often Know When They Are Being Evaluated
- OpenAI GPT-5 System Card
- Attack Selection Reduces Safety in Concentrated AI Control Settings against Trusted Monitoring
- Instrumental Monitor Evasion Emerges Under Ordinary Task Pressure
- Prefill Awareness in Large Language Models
Related papers
- MAVEN-T: Reinforced Heterogeneous Distillation for Real-Time Multi-Agent Trajectory Prediction
- Model Discovery Agent: LLM-assisted Bayesian experiment design for data-efficient discovery of mechanistic world models
- Agents' Last Exam
- The Clinician's Veto: Navigating Trust, Liability, and Uncertainty in Autonomous AI Prescribing
- MindHelper: Closed-Loop Embodied Mental-State Reasoning for Precision Intervention
- Incumbent Advantage: Brand Bias and Cognitive Manipulation Dynamics in LLM Recommendation Systems