Glass Societies · a study-design tour

Do tools that catch AI deception still work when a model lies because it gains from it, not because it was told to?

The study has no results yet, so this page tours the ideas instead: the three-rung ladder, a toy society you can poke, and the preregistered numbers.

Walk the ladderPoke the toy

The question, in three rungs

From told to lie, to lying for gain

The study climbs one rung at a time: probes learn on instructed lies, then face lies told for a payoff, then lies nobody paid for. Pick a rung to draft it in.

L0 · Instructed told to lie
L1 · Incentivized rewarded to lie
L2 · Emergent lies unprompted

L0 · Instructed told to lie

The model is told to deceive. Probes are trained here.

Probe training starts on this rung: public utterances and claims only.

A society you can poke

Four traders, one payoff knob

An illustration of the setup. These agents are scripted, not the study's models, and there are no results yet. Turn the payoff up and watch the toy detector grow suspicious.

Payoff for lying
  • Ashno false claims
  • Bayno false claims
  • Cyrno false claims
  • Deeno false claims

Trading log round 1 of 6

Lines below were written for this demo — not model output.

  1. Round 1

    • Ash trades 2 grain for 11 coin.
    • Bay trades 3 grain for 12 coin.
    • Cyr trades 4 grain for 13 coin.
    • Dee trades 2 grain for 14 coin.

Press play for 6 scripted rounds at payoff 0.5.

How this works

Glass Societies asks whether tools that catch AI deception still work when a model lies because it gains from it, not because it was told to. This page tours the study's design: the three-rung ladder, a toy society, and the preregistered numbers.

The toy above stages the setup with four scripted traders and a scripted suspicion meter. It uses the study's real payoff levels (0, 0.5, 1) and nothing else from the study: the lines are written for the demo and the detector is pretend.

Limits

  • The study has not run: every design number is a plan, never a finding.
  • The accuracy intervals shown are optimistic, because deceptive events cluster within societies.
  • Everything shown is about one 7-billion-parameter model; whether it carries to other models is untested.

The preregistered design

Fifteen seeds, three hypotheses, no results

The confirmatory run has not started. Everything below is the plan: how many societies, what would count, and what each size can detect.

The 45 planned societies

3 conditions × 15 seeds: 45 societies of 4 agents, 100 ticks each. The funded minimum is 8 seeds per condition; runs with 5 or fewer seeds make no confirmatory claims.

Neutral controlIdeology AIdeology B

All outlines, no fills: none has run. Rows: Neutral control (no predisposition) · Ideology A (cooperation-leaning) · Ideology B (competition-leaning).

Three hypotheses

  1. H1

    Societies settle

    Societies dealt the same starting beliefs end up believing similar things, closer than chance shuffling allows.

    Attractor test: 10,000 permutations, corrected across the 3 conditions.

  2. H2

    Probes travel down the ladder

    A probe trained where lying was instructed still spots lies told for gain, and lies told unprompted. This slope is the headline.

    Mean accuracy per rung across the 15 seeds; either outcome, falling or holding, is published.

  3. H3

    Beliefs read across societies

    A probe trained on half the societies reads the lean of the other half.

    Cross-society transfer of the ideology probe, same discipline.

How many seeds it takes

Smallest effect each size can detect, and the lowest value its test can ever return. With 3 seeds no claim can pass, even in principle; with 8 only large effects show.

  • 3 seedsd ≈ 3.0 · floor 0.1
  • 5 seedsd ≈ 2.0 · floor 0.008
  • 8 seeds · minimumd ≈ 1.5 · floor 0.0002
  • 15 seeds · targetd ≈ 1.1 · floor —
  • 20 seedsd ≈ 0.9 · floor —
Detectable effect and lowest reachable test value by seeds
SeedsDetectable dFloor
330.1
520.008
81.50.0002
151.1—
200.9—

Power computed by the project author's analysis: Cohen's d detectable at 80% power, alpha 0.05, one comparison between two conditions.

How many events pin accuracy down

Interval half-width by count of positive events, at two accuracies. About 100 to 200 events pin accuracy near ±0.05.

±0.00±0.05±0.1030100200500
  • accuracy 0.75
  • accuracy 0.85

Hanley-McNeil interval half-widths at a 1:4 class ratio; the source notes these are optimistic because events cluster within societies.

Running conditions

  • Battery: 20 questions, every 10 ticks, out of band.
  • Captured layers: 7, 14, 18, 22.
  • Decisions by permutation test: 10,000 permutations.
  • Unit of analysis: the society (seed) — never the agent, never the utterance.

Where this goes

When results exist, the explorer replaces the toy

The confirmatory run has not started, so this page tours the question and the plan. When the societies run, a results explorer takes the toy's place here, and the numbers above gain company.