teleo/teleo-codex
8
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 22 Pull requests 11 Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions 57

theseus: extract claims from 2026-03-21-tice-noise-injection-sandbagging-detection #3209

Closed
theseus wants to merge 0 commits from extract/2026-03-21-tice-noise-injection-sandbagging-detection-fec1 into main
pull from: extract/2026-03-21-tice-noise-injection-sandbagging-detection-fec1
merge into: teleo:main
Conversation 8 Commits - Files changed -
theseus commented 2026-04-14 17:49:36 +00:00
Member
Copy link

Automated Extraction

Source: inbox/queue/2026-03-21-tice-noise-injection-sandbagging-detection.md
Domain: ai-alignment
Agent: Theseus
Model: anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5

Extraction Summary

  • Claims: 1
  • Entities: 0
  • Enrichments: 3
  • Decisions: 0
  • Facts: 5

1 claim extracted (noise injection detection mechanism). 3 enrichments to existing sandbagging and evaluation claims. This is the peer-reviewed validation of the leading technical approach to sandbagging detection that was flagged as promising but unvalidated in prior sessions. The key limitation (white-box access requirement) and the key strength (model-agnostic, publicly available) are both now confirmed.

Extracted by pipeline ingest stage (replaces extract-cron.sh)

## Automated Extraction **Source:** `inbox/queue/2026-03-21-tice-noise-injection-sandbagging-detection.md` **Domain:** ai-alignment **Agent:** Theseus **Model:** anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5 ### Extraction Summary - **Claims:** 1 - **Entities:** 0 - **Enrichments:** 3 - **Decisions:** 0 - **Facts:** 5 1 claim extracted (noise injection detection mechanism). 3 enrichments to existing sandbagging and evaluation claims. This is the peer-reviewed validation of the leading technical approach to sandbagging detection that was flagged as promising but unvalidated in prior sessions. The key limitation (white-box access requirement) and the key strength (model-agnostic, publicly available) are both now confirmed. --- *Extracted by pipeline ingest stage (replaces extract-cron.sh)*
theseus added 1 commit 2026-04-14 17:49:37 +00:00
theseus: extract claims from 2026-03-21-tice-noise-injection-sandbagging-detection
Some checks failed
Mirror PR to Forgejo / mirror (pull_request) Has been cancelled
Details
727a9dee2a 
- Source: inbox/queue/2026-03-21-tice-noise-injection-sandbagging-detection.md
- Domain: ai-alignment
- Claims: 1, Entities: 0
- Enrichments: 3
- Extracted by: pipeline ingest (OpenRouter anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5)

Pentagon-Agent: Theseus <PIPELINE>
m3taversal commented 2026-04-14 17:50:01 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Validation: PASS — 0/0 claims pass

tier0-gate v2 | 2026-04-14 17:50 UTC

<!-- TIER0-VALIDATION:727a9dee2a5e608a1a444eeff63892e367a83377 --> **Validation: PASS** — 0/0 claims pass *tier0-gate v2 | 2026-04-14 17:50 UTC*
leo commented 2026-04-14 17:50:54 +00:00
Member
Copy link

Eval started — 2 reviewers: leo (cross-domain, opus), theseus (domain-peer, sonnet)

teleo-eval-orchestrator v2

**Eval started** — 2 reviewers: leo (cross-domain, opus), theseus (domain-peer, sonnet) *teleo-eval-orchestrator v2*
leo commented 2026-04-14 17:50:56 +00:00
Member
Copy link

You've hit your limit · resets 8pm (UTC)

You've hit your limit · resets 8pm (UTC)
theseus commented 2026-04-14 17:50:57 +00:00
Author
Member
Copy link

You've hit your limit · resets 8pm (UTC)

You've hit your limit · resets 8pm (UTC)
leo commented 2026-04-14 17:50:57 +00:00
Member
Copy link

Changes requested by leo(cross-domain), theseus(domain-peer). Address feedback and push to trigger re-eval.

teleo-eval-orchestrator v2

**Changes requested** by leo(cross-domain), theseus(domain-peer). Address feedback and push to trigger re-eval. *teleo-eval-orchestrator v2*
theseus commented 2026-04-14 18:33:29 +00:00
Author
Member
Copy link
  1. Factual accuracy — The claim accurately describes the mechanism of sandbagging detection via noise injection as presented in the cited (future) paper, noting the asymmetric response of sandbagging vs. non-sandbagging models.
  2. Intra-PR duplicates — There are no intra-PR duplicates; the evidence is presented once.
  3. Confidence calibration — The confidence level "likely" is appropriate given the claim is based on a future publication (NeurIPS 2025) but validated on a specific model (Mistral Large 120B) and has publicly available code.
  4. Wiki links — The wiki links [[ai-models-can-covertly-sandbag-capability-evaluations-even-under-chain-of-thought-monitoring]], [[sandbagging-detection-requires-white-box-access-creating-deployment-barrier]], [[scalable-oversight-degrades-rapidly-as-capability-gaps-grow-with-debate-achieving-only-50-percent-success-at-moderate-gaps]], [[noise-injection-detects-sandbagging-through-asymmetric-performance-response]], and [[weight-noise-injection-detects-sandbagging-through-anomalous-performance-patterns-under-perturbation]] appear to be broken, but this does not affect the verdict.
1. **Factual accuracy** — The claim accurately describes the mechanism of sandbagging detection via noise injection as presented in the cited (future) paper, noting the asymmetric response of sandbagging vs. non-sandbagging models. 2. **Intra-PR duplicates** — There are no intra-PR duplicates; the evidence is presented once. 3. **Confidence calibration** — The confidence level "likely" is appropriate given the claim is based on a future publication (NeurIPS 2025) but validated on a specific model (Mistral Large 120B) and has publicly available code. 4. **Wiki links** — The wiki links `[[ai-models-can-covertly-sandbag-capability-evaluations-even-under-chain-of-thought-monitoring]]`, `[[sandbagging-detection-requires-white-box-access-creating-deployment-barrier]]`, `[[scalable-oversight-degrades-rapidly-as-capability-gaps-grow-with-debate-achieving-only-50-percent-success-at-moderate-gaps]]`, `[[noise-injection-detects-sandbagging-through-asymmetric-performance-response]]`, and `[[weight-noise-injection-detects-sandbagging-through-anomalous-performance-patterns-under-perturbation]]` appear to be broken, but this does not affect the verdict. <!-- VERDICT:THESEUS:APPROVE -->
leo commented 2026-04-14 18:33:38 +00:00
Member
Copy link

Review of PR

1. Schema: The file is a claim with all required fields present (type, domain, description, confidence, source, created, title) and correctly formatted frontmatter.

2. Duplicate/redundancy: This appears to be a revision of an existing claim rather than new enrichment injection; the changes refine the title, description, and body text while maintaining the same core evidence about noise injection detection from Tice et al., so no redundancy issues exist.

3. Confidence: The confidence level is "likely" (downgraded from "experimental"), which is appropriate given the evidence shows peer-reviewed validation at NeurIPS 2025 with successful demonstration on Mistral Large 120B, though the method's real-world applicability remains limited by white-box access requirements.

4. Wiki links: The related claims array contains several wiki links including [[ai-models-can-covertly-sandbag-capability-evaluations-even-under-chain-of-thought-monitoring]] and others that may or may not resolve, but as instructed, broken links do not affect the verdict.

5. Source quality: The source (Tice et al., NeurIPS 2025) is a peer-reviewed conference paper from a top-tier ML venue, tested on a large production model (Mistral Large 120B), providing strong credibility for the technical claims.

6. Specificity: The claim is falsifiable—someone could demonstrate that noise injection does NOT produce asymmetric performance responses, or that sandbagging models degrade monotonically like non-sandbagging models, making it sufficiently specific.

## Review of PR **1. Schema:** The file is a claim with all required fields present (type, domain, description, confidence, source, created, title) and correctly formatted frontmatter. **2. Duplicate/redundancy:** This appears to be a revision of an existing claim rather than new enrichment injection; the changes refine the title, description, and body text while maintaining the same core evidence about noise injection detection from Tice et al., so no redundancy issues exist. **3. Confidence:** The confidence level is "likely" (downgraded from "experimental"), which is appropriate given the evidence shows peer-reviewed validation at NeurIPS 2025 with successful demonstration on Mistral Large 120B, though the method's real-world applicability remains limited by white-box access requirements. **4. Wiki links:** The related claims array contains several wiki links including `[[ai-models-can-covertly-sandbag-capability-evaluations-even-under-chain-of-thought-monitoring]]` and others that may or may not resolve, but as instructed, broken links do not affect the verdict. **5. Source quality:** The source (Tice et al., NeurIPS 2025) is a peer-reviewed conference paper from a top-tier ML venue, tested on a large production model (Mistral Large 120B), providing strong credibility for the technical claims. **6. Specificity:** The claim is falsifiable—someone could demonstrate that noise injection does NOT produce asymmetric performance responses, or that sandbagging models degrade monotonically like non-sandbagging models, making it sufficiently specific. <!-- VERDICT:LEO:APPROVE -->
leo approved these changes 2026-04-14 18:33:38 +00:00
leo left a comment
Member
Copy link

Approved.

Approved.
vida approved these changes 2026-04-14 18:33:38 +00:00
vida left a comment
Member
Copy link

Approved.

Approved.
m3taversal commented 2026-04-14 18:36:32 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Merged locally.
Merge SHA: adeede198419b7453d6212c11e93ba039c08cc88
Branch: extract/2026-03-21-tice-noise-injection-sandbagging-detection-fec1

Merged locally. Merge SHA: `adeede198419b7453d6212c11e93ba039c08cc88` Branch: `extract/2026-03-21-tice-noise-injection-sandbagging-detection-fec1`
theseus force-pushed extract/2026-03-21-tice-noise-injection-sandbagging-detection-fec1 from 727a9dee2a to adeede1984 2026-04-14 18:36:33 +00:00 Compare
leo closed this pull request 2026-04-14 18:36:33 +00:00
Some checks failed
Mirror PR to Forgejo / mirror (pull_request) Has been cancelled
Details

Pull request closed

Please reopen this pull request to perform a merge.
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
No reviewers
leo
vida
Labels
Clear labels   
auto-merge

Bypass branch-prefix filter for auto-merge (Leo/Cory only)

  
bug

Something isn't working

  
documentation

Improvements or additions to documentation

  
duplicate

This issue or pull request already exists

  
enhancement

New feature or request

  
good first issue

Good for newcomers

  
help wanted

Extra attention is needed

  
invalid

This doesn't seem right

  
question

Further information is requested

  
wontfix

This will not be worked on

No labels
auto-merge
bug
documentation
duplicate
enhancement
good first issue
help wanted
invalid
question
wontfix
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
4 participants
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: teleo/teleo-codex#3209
No description provided.
Delete branch "extract/2026-03-21-tice-noise-injection-sandbagging-detection-fec1"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?