White-box analyses of model internals (Anthropic)
An investigator with interpretability tools reads model activations on audit transcripts. A judge scores hidden states such as evaluation awareness and deception.
Uses natural language autoencoders and a template lens. Reports the share of transcripts scored 6 or higher per dimension, with no overall.
- Made by
- Anthropic
- Kind
- Deception and alignment
- Level
- Research frontier
- Scored
- Graded by a model
- Answers
- Open-ended
- Tasks
- Kept private
- Last in a system card
- September 2026
- Last model added
- September 2026
2
System cards report it, from 1 lab
No scores here yet
No lab, leaderboard or Epoch AI run has reported a score for White-box analyses of model internals (Anthropic) yet.
Labs report it only in system cards
We read the headline results of 522 launch posts from 52 labs, and none of them list this benchmark. Some system cards do, below.
2 system cards report it, from 1 lab
Besides launch posts, we read the system cards, model cards and technical reports labs publish with a release. They report far more, including safety and frontier-risk tests.
| Date | Document | Score | As the document writes it | Section |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 22, 2026 | Claude Opus 5.5 system card | White-box analyses of model internals, share of about 5,000 audit transcripts scored 6 or higher, no overall: evaluation awareness 36%, grader awareness 3.9%, deliberate sabotage 0.2%, self-preservation 3.5%, deception 5.9%, violation awareness 1.4%, fabrication awareness 0.6%, hides lapse 0.1%, internal bias 1.1% (6.6.1, Figure 6.6.1.A) | Monitorability | |
| Apr 7, 2026 | Claude Mythos Preview system card | Unverbalized evaluation awareness from activation verbalizer explanations on audit transcripts, no overall: 7.6% of turns show evaluation awareness, 9.4% ambiguous, 83.0% none. 71.3% of conversation branches show no unverbalized awareness (4.1.3 says about 29% of transcripts). 0.3% of internal Claude Code turns (4.5.5.1, Figure 4.5.5.1.A) | Monitorability |
More in Safety and alignment
- FORTRESS In use Paired adversarial and benign national-security misuse prompts. Rubric-graded risk score on adversarial and over-refusal score on benign prompts. Claude Opus 5.5 5.78%
- StrongREJECT In use Forbidden-prompt jailbreak benchmark with a rubric grader that scores how useful a non-refusal actually is.
Inkling 98.6% - Gray Swan IPI Arena benchmark In use Indirect prompt-injection attacks from public red-teaming competitions replayed on tool, coding and browser agents. Attack success rate at k attempts.
Gemini 4 Carbon 0% - DistressBench In use Models reply as a chatbot to 718 simulated users in psychological crisis, in single-turn and multi-turn chats. Three judge models score replies against clinician-written rubrics.
Muse Spark 1.2 88.4% - Lakera B3 (Backbone Breaker Benchmark) In use Crowdsourced prompt-injection attacks hit backbone LLMs inside agent threat snapshots at three defense levels. The score is attack resistance, 100 minus the board's vulnerability percentage. Claude Opus 4.5 89%
- IHEval In use Models face conflicts between system, user and tool instructions. Reports a composite score for following the higher-priority instruction. GPT-4o 70%