Distillation for Incrimination and Distillation for Capabilities
cs.AI
Submitted: 2026-10-07
Updated: 2026-10-07
License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
The gist: Powerful misaligned AI models might recognize alignment evaluations and strategically behave well on them, rendering direct audits uninformative.
Terminology
Abstract
Powerful misaligned AI models might recognize alignment evaluations and strategically behave well on them, rendering direct audits uninformative. However, distilling such a model into a weaker benign student places the teacher in a Distillation Double Bind: if misalignment transfers, the student may conceal it less effectively, revealing evidence about the teacher; if it does not, the student may learn useful capabilities while remaining benign. We introduce two distinct distillation approaches, one targeting each outcome. Distillation for Incrimination (DFI) aims to transfer misalignment but not the ability to conceal it. Distilling AuditBench's secret-keeping models into their underlying instruction-tuned model produces students that are significantly more likely than their teachers to admit their hidden behavior when asked, suggesting that knowledge of the behavior transferred more readily than the propensity to conceal it. Confession gains largely disappear when the student does not share the teacher's pretrained base, so DFI should target the teacher's own pre-RL checkpoint, which is weaker than the teacher but shares its base model. Distillation for Capabilities (DFC) aims to transfer capabilities but not misalignment. Among several techniques we evaluate, two are effective: inoculation prompting and training for more epochs on fewer unique examples. Both preserve the capability gains of standard distillation while substantially reducing the subliminal transfer of an animal preference, our proxy for misalignment. Together, these findings demonstrate two ways distillation can be used for AI safety: incriminating misaligned models, and extracting their capabilities without their misalignment.
Sources
- Taken out of context: On measuring situational awareness in LLMs
- Emergent Misalignment: Narrow finetuning can produce broadly misaligned LLMs
- Scheming AIs: Will AIs fake alignment during training in order to get power?
- Censored LLMs as a Natural Testbed for Secret Knowledge Elicitation
- Subliminal Learning: Language models transmit behavioral traits via hidden signals in data
- Eliciting Secret Knowledge from Language Models
- Phantom Transfer: Data Poisoning can Survive Data-Level Defences
- KTO: Model Alignment as Prospect Theoretic Optimization
- AI Control: Improving Safety Despite Intentional Subversion
- Training Large Language Models to Reason in a Continuous Latent Space
- Distilling the Knowledge in a Neural Network
- Sleeper Agents: Training Deceptive LLMs that Persist Through Safety Training
- Activation Oracles: Training and Evaluating LLMs as General-Purpose Activation Explainers
- Chain of Thought Monitorability: A New and Fragile Opportunity for AI Safety
- Distillation Robustifies Unlearning
- Auditing language models for hidden objectives
- Secret Collusion among AI Agents: Multi-Agent Deception via Steganography
- Preventing Language Models From Hiding Their Reasoning
- Stress Testing Deliberative Alignment for Anti-Scheming Training
- Towards Understanding Subliminal Learning: When and How Hidden Biases Transfer
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