arXiv (All)
open access
Hidden Reasoning Must Leak, but Need Not Be Readable: Fundamental Opportunities and Limits for Chain-of-Thought Monitoring
Can reasoning models trick chain of thought (CoT) monitors and perform hidden computation without revealing it in their thinking traces? We show that the answer depends on the underlying task difficulty and the model size. Simple computations can be performed covertly; however, beyond a threshold de
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Selective Disclosure of Hidden Directives in Reasoning Models: Behavioral Asymmetry and Steering#793293
- Selective Disclosure of Hidden Directives in Reasoning Models: Behavioral Asymmetry and Steering#789289
- Cognitive Effort in Large Language Models: A New Mirror for Seeing Human Reasoning#691027
- Chain-of-Thought Faithfulness of Reasoning Models Varies with Where and How Preference Cues Are Delivered#820676
- Thinking Leakage: A Causal Audit of NoThink Post-Training in Hybrid Reasoning Models#1076338
Record · ID 1141355
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive