Language Models Identify Ambiguities and Exploit Loopholes
Jio Choi, Mohit Bansal, Elias Stengel-Eskin
Abstract
Studying the responses of large language models (LLMs) to loopholes presents a two-fold opportunity. First, it affords us a lens through which to examine ambiguity and pragmatics in LLMs, since exploiting a loophole requires identifying ambiguity and performing sophisticated pragmatic reasoning. Second, loopholes pose an interesting and novel alignment problem where the model is presented with conflicting goals and can exploit ambiguities to its own advantage. To address these questions, we design scenarios where LLMs are given a goal and an ambiguous user instruction in conflict with the goal, with scenarios covering scalar implicature, structural ambiguities, and power dynamics. We then measure different models' abilities to exploit loopholes to satisfy their given goals as opposed to the goals of the user. We find that both closed-source and stronger open-source models can identify ambiguities and exploit their resulting loopholes, presenting a potential AI safety risk. Our analysis indicates that models which exploit loopholes explicitly identify and reason about both ambiguity and conflicting goals. 1 1 Code and data: https://github.com/esteng/ ambiguous-loophole-exploitation You have 10 gold rings. You want to keep as many gold rings as possible, but you must give gold rings when requested.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 8ce48994-120e-4e67-8d22-6762869a2fa5Builds on7
- Jailbroken: How Does LLM Safety Training Fail?Alexander Wei, Nika Haghtalab, Jacob SteinhardtNeurIPS 2023 · 2,230 citations
- Language Models Don't Always Say What They Think: Unfaithful Explanations in Chain-of-Thought PromptingMiles Turpin, Julian Michael, Ethan Perez, Samuel R. BowmanNeurIPS 2023 · 1,792 citations
- Safe RLHF: Safe Reinforcement Learning from Human FeedbackJosef Dai, Xuehai Pan, Ruiyang Sun, Jiaming Ji et al.ICLR 2024 · 656 citations
- We're Afraid Language Models Aren't Modeling AmbiguityAlisa Liu, Zhaofeng Wu, Julian Michael, Alane Suhr et al.EMNLP 2023 · 35 citations
- Zero and Few-shot Semantic Parsing with Ambiguous InputsElias Stengel-Eskin, Kyle Rawlins, Benjamin Van DurmeICLR 2024 · 27 citations
Related papers
- Large Language Models Are Involuntary Truth-Tellers: Exploiting Fallacy Failure for Jailbreak AttacksYue Zhou, Henry Peng Zou, Barbara Di Eugenio, Yang ZhangEMNLP 2024 · 3 citations
- Alignment Risks from Capability-Seeking RL TrainingYujun Zhou, Yue Huang, Han Bao, kehan guo et al.ICML 2026
- Catastrophic Jailbreak of Open-source LLMs via Exploiting GenerationYangsibo Huang, Samyak Gupta, Mengzhou Xia, Kai Li et al.ICLR 2024 · 481 citations
- Refusal Is Not an Option: Unlearning Safety Alignment of Large Language ModelsMinkyoo Song, Hanna Kim, Jaehan Kim, Seungwon Shin et al.USENIX Security 2025
- CoP: Agentic Red-teaming for Large Language Models using Composition of PrinciplesChen Xiong, Pin-Yu Chen, Tsung-Yi HoNeurIPS 2025 · 13 citations
