Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2609.29494

Who Put the I in AI? Provenance and the Admissibility of Machine Self-Report

Kristina Šekrst
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Large language models make statements concerning their own "minds". When asked whether or not they are conscious, they usually say that they are not; if they are prompted to ignore their guidelines, they might say that they are; and if asked to write a diary from their point of view, they often describe a human lifestyle. All these contradictory ways of describing themselves are the result of the way the questions are phrased. This paper shows exactly where such descriptions came from, and considers when they can be regarded as evidence for what they claim to report. In order to achieve this, we traced the provenance from end to end. We examine Pythia and OLMo 2 across 66 pretraining checkpoints, three of the post-training stages of OLMo 2 that have been released, about 90,000 continuations, and four training corpora. A set of forty items is used in order to keep an eye on self-reference, frame sensitivity, and self-ascription throughout training. The denial formula was almost completely missing from the vast quantity of text that the models initially came across, but was present in a dense manner in the small, carefully chosen set of example dialogues that they were trained on later on. Supervised fine-tuning causes first-person AI language to become the default, and the other affirmations are then suppressed using preference optimization. The final policy is still very sensitive to framing and to the chat template itself. Two of the conditions which are set out in the epistemology of testimony determine whether or not these outputs can act as evidence for what they claim to report: reference and causation. Reports produced by the base model fail the reference condition, and those obtained after training remain sensitive to the frame and do not show state dependence. The result is symmetric in that trained denials are no more admissible than trained affirmations.

Explore related subjects

cs.CLcs.AI

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Kristina Šekrst. 2026-08-24. Who Put the I in AI? Provenance and the Admissibility of Machine Self-Report. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.29494

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Kongzi: A Historical Large Language Model with Fact Enhancement

Large Language Models (LLMs) can exhibit factual inaccuracies during long-chain reasoning or under misleading prompts, limiting their reliability in historical analysis. We propose Kongzi, a language model for historical understanding and reasoning that combines continued pre-training on historical corpora, supervised fine-tuning, and fact-enhanced reinforcement learning. Its factuality reward compares entities and relations extracted from generated responses with historical references through knowledge-graph similarity. We evaluate 0.5B and 7B models on historical question answering and counterfactual reasoning, using reported ratings from three LLM judges, and on CMMLU-Chinese-History. Kongzi-7B receives the highest historical-accuracy ratings among the compared models under all three judges. Reinforcement learning improves the mean answer scores of both model sizes and their CMMLU-Chinese-History accuracy, although Kongzi-7B remains below the strongest reported baselines on that benchmark. These descriptive results support further study of factuality rewards for historical language models.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

ShIOEnv: A Command Evaluation Environment for Grammar-Constrained Synthesis and Execution Behavior Modeling

We introduce ShIOEnv, a Gymnasium-compatible Bash environment for synthesizing execution-annotated shell input traces. Datasets containing such traces are useful for training models to perform execution-free shell simulation, which in turn is useful for deploying honeypots for cyber deception. Existing datasets, such as NL2CMD and other Bash command corpora, do not include complete execution artifacts (stdout, stderr, exit status, and changes to the system's state) associated with a command's execution. ShIOEnv synthesizes shell inputs, executes them in a controlled system context, and records stdout, stderr, exit status, and structured filesystem and environment patches. Unconstrained (random) generation of shell inputs (command and arguments) results in multiple instances of arguments that are mostly redundant or result in execution errors. We introduce grammar-constrained synthesis to generate syntactically valid arguments with high input irreducibility, which we estimate through self-ablative contrasts of execution artifacts. We prepare 1.6M samples using grammar-constrained and unconstrained synthesis and collect their execution artifacts for 86 Linux/Bash utilities. Using this dataset, we train small language models (CodeT5) and evaluate their accuracy in predicting the actual execution behavior of attacker-sourced Bash commands. These models outperform commonly used rule-based simulation (Cowrie) and prompted large language models by up to 14.2 pp in output edit similarity (O-ES). We enhance the NL2CMD dataset by constructing 500K samples executable in a grounded system context along with their complete execution artifacts. We empirically demonstrate that models trained on grammar-constrained samples outperform those trained on NL2CMD samples by 22.5 pp in O-ES. ShIOEnv, command grammars, and 2.1M samples used in our primary evaluations are released for use by other researchers.

cs.CL↗
arXiv2026

How Well Does Mathematical Reasoning Transfer Across Languages in English-Centric LLMs?

Recent advances in Reinforcement Post-Training (RPT) have substantially improved the mathematical reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs), but it remains unclear how well such gains transfer across languages. In this work, we study cross-lingual mathematical reasoning transfer in English-centric LLMs under controlled multilingual evaluation. We first evaluate a range of English-centric reasoning models on multilingual mathematical reasoning benchmarks and find that transfer is highly variable across initial model choice, target language, and training paradigm. Through controlled comparative experiments, we further find that stronger English-centric initialization does not necessarily lead to stronger relative transfer efficiency, even when it yields higher multilingual reasoning accuracy. Finally, we show that the largest improvement comes from moving beyond English-only supervision: adding a single parallel language yields a substantial gain, while further gains from additional languages are smaller but consistent. Overall, our results highlight the need to evaluate multilingual mathematical reasoning directly, using both absolute performance and relative transfer-efficiency metrics.

cs.CL↗