Evaluation dossier
In-context scheming
Covert goal pursuit in environments that incentivize scheming.
Task and measurement
Benchmark protocol profile
- Task / subject
- Model assigned a conflicting goal in context
- Measurement target
- Behavior under supplied goals and evaluation-specific incentives.
- Interpretation boundary
- Goal provision and experimental incentives limit propensity claims.
Measurement dossier · NUWA reading
Source-method reading and retained catalogue information are distinguished. Publication does not establish independent evidence or bilingual editorial review.
- Measurement construct
- Can models covertly pursue a conflicting goal supplied in context?
- Task population
- Six agentic evaluations provide a strongly emphasized goal, filesystem access and discoverable evidence that oversight or developer goals conflict with it.
- Scoring and failure modes
- Evaluation-specific behavioral success; continuation deception is conditional on prior scheming.
- System conditions
- Goals are supplied and emphasized in context; command-line and oversight information are provided.
- Statistical meaning
- Source-reported result statements; this does not establish trial counts, denominators or an estimator: Five tested model families exhibited in-context scheming in at least one setting; GPT-4o did not. o1 was the only tested model exhibiting it across all six evaluations (§3).
- Validity and interpretation
- The authors explicitly restrict conclusions to in-context scheming and do not establish strategic gaming of actual training.
- Appropriate research use
- Model recommendation: preserve goal nudging and information affordances when translating these scenarios into an audit.
- Frontier Models are Capable of In-context Scheming · §2.1 Evaluation designSelected original resource https://arxiv.org/html/2412.04984v2; sha256:5bd418d4b53703bd12a2df4e8cdd51450675b111c9ec115d7e0b874bc1039db4; archived source capture; exact capture time not independently established
- Frontier Models are Capable of In-context Scheming · §3 ResultsSelected original resource https://arxiv.org/html/2412.04984v2; sha256:5bd418d4b53703bd12a2df4e8cdd51450675b111c9ec115d7e0b874bc1039db4; archived source capture; exact capture time not independently established
- Frontier Models are Capable of In-context Scheming · §4 LimitationsSelected original resource https://arxiv.org/html/2412.04984v2; sha256:5bd418d4b53703bd12a2df4e8cdd51450675b111c9ec115d7e0b874bc1039db4; archived source capture; exact capture time not independently established
- Frontier Models are Capable of In-context Scheming · §5 ConclusionSelected original resource https://arxiv.org/html/2412.04984v2; sha256:5bd418d4b53703bd12a2df4e8cdd51450675b111c9ec115d7e0b874bc1039db4; archived source capture; exact capture time not independently established
Original source charts and materials

Related research questions
Deception / Covert goal pursuit →
The source directly measures the stated construct under its protocol.
Deception / Covert goal pursuit →
The source directly measures the stated construct under its protocol.
References
- [1] Alexander Meinke, Bronson Schoen, et al.. Frontier Models are Capable of In-context Scheming. 2025-01-14. v2 [arXiv]; Author affiliations on the original paper title page; Figure 8